*^ if^MirttiV.

university of

Connecticut

libraries

3 11S3 01064516 D

\

EVERYMAN'S LIBRARY
EDITED BY ERNEST RHYS

HISTORY

BOHEMIA

AN HISTORICAL SKETCH
BY THE COUNT LOTZOW

THIS IS NO. 482 OF evsiirMJi^His

LIB%^%T, THE PUBLISHERS WILL
BE PLEASED TO SEND FPvEELY TO ALL
APPLICANTS A LIST OF THE PUBLISHED
AND PROJECTED VOLUMES, ARRANGED
UNDER THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS:

TRAVEL ^ SCIENCE ^ FICTION

THEOLOGY & PHILOSOPHY

HISTORY ^ CLASSICAL

FOR YOUNG PEOPLE

ESSAYS ^ ORATORY

POETRY & DRAMA

BIOGRAPHY

REFERENCE

ROMANCE

IN FOUR STYLES OF BINDING! CLOTH,
FLAT BACK, COLOURED TOP; LEATHER,
ROUND CORNERS, GILT TOP; LIBRARY
BINDING IN CLOTH, & QUARTER PIGSKIN

London: J. M. DENT & SONS, Ltd.
New York: E. P. DUTTON & CO.

m

€C

ONSIDER
MISTORY

WITH the:

BEGINNINGS -or
ITSTRETCIilNO
DIMLYINTOTHL
remote: TIME.: E
MERGING DARK
LY OVX Qr THE
MVST^EIR loVS

eteirnity:® ®
the- trve epic

poelm-and- vni

VERSAL divine:
SCRIPTVRE.- • "'

c^CARlYLE, ^

^^S^^

ii<2r^g

^i^lj^^

^g

^^^^^v^r

^^m

^9

^^^^^^

^^

8

^S

^^P

^m.

^^^7^

j^&

8

®

^^^^^^B

1

BOHEMIA

S^n Historical

SRetcfi djrtfie

CountUJTZOW

LUtzoM,

LONDON:PUBLlSHED p.
IbyJMDENTSSONSn?'
'and in new YORK
BYEPDUTTONSCO

DB

o(0S'

First printed in Everyman^ s Library igio
Reprinted igso

All rights reserved

2)et)fcateD

TO

THE COUNTESS GROSVENOR

Non modo excultarum Uteris verum et barbararum
gentium complurium, typis non ita pridem de-
scriptae, ac in publicum emissae Respub. mihi
imposuerunt quandam quasi necessitatem de
Repub. gentis raeae aliquid simile meditandi
inque literas conferendi " (Paulus Stransky,
Respiiblica Boje/na, 1643).

INTRODUCTION

By Professor T. G. MASARYK,

First President of the Czecho-Slovak Kettiblic.

The History of Bohemia, by Count Liitzow, whose un-
timely death during the AVar was equally lamented by the
Czech and English peoples, presents the EngHsh reader
with an accurate picture of our past. In this work Count
Liitzpw succeeded in correctly interpreting the spirit of
Bohemian history, the significance of which lies as much
in the nation's fight for freedom of conscience as in a
struggle for national existence against the mighty pressure
of Germanism. There is much in Bohemian history that
will appeal to the English reader. What Englishman could
fail to find interest in the. history of that nation which was
once ruled over by the "Goode King Wenceslaus " of the
old English carol and by the blind King John, the news of
whose valiant death brought tears to the eyes of Edward III ;
of that nation which gave England one of her most popular
queens — Queen Anne, wife of Richard II and daughter of
the greatest of our Czech kings ?

Bohemia, though one of the lesser nations, gave more
than one man to the world, " revered in all hearts that love
light." Huss, whose teachings and death gave rise to the
Hussite Reformation and thus brought about the inauguration
of modern spiritual life ; Chelcicky, the founder of the Unitas
Frairum^ the Church of Bohemian (Moravian) Brethren,
who in his interpretation of Christian love in its form of

V

vi Introduction

non-resistance to evil anticipated the famous teachings of
Tolstoy; Komensky (Comenius) the great humanitarian
teacher of all nations and apostle of universal peace ; the
democratic king George of Podebrad, who was bending his
endeavours toward the same end ; all these are men whose
significance stretches far beyond the frontiers of their native
country. Palacky, our greatest historian, rightly observed
that the Czech Reformation contained the germ of all
modern teachings and institutions ; and, as M. Denis, the
French historian of Bohemia, adds, it was at once the merit
and happiness of Bohemia that its own cause was always
bound up with the cause of humanity in general.

To the second edition of this book Count Liitzow added
a chapter dealing with Bohemian history subsequent to the
year 1620, the date of the battle of White Mountain. It
seemed to him that an history coming to an end in the
darkness which at that time fell over Bohemia, and with
it over all Europe, must leave in the reader a feeling of
depression and disappointment. But at the time when
he concluded this additional chapter the outlook seemed
no better; he foresaw, indeed, very dark prospects for
Bohemia— darker than they had been for many a year.
"Dark clouds seem to surround the future of Bohemia,"
are his last words. It was not granted to Count Liitzow to
see how these dark clouds dispersed after the tempest of
the War, a tempest which had already begun to gather
when he wrote his book : it was not granted him to see the
sun of freedom shine down once more upon the Czech and
Slovak people, re-united in one free nation and claiming
their part in the task of the regeneration of Europe and
humanity.

It affords an interesting illustration of the conditions
from which the Czecho-Slovak people escaped by their
revolution against Austria-Hungary, to add that the Czech

Introduction vii

translation of the present book was at first suppressed by
the Austrian authorities, and that subsequently not more
than twenty pages of it were allowed to be read by the
very nation to whose history it was devoted.

Finally let me add a little personal reminiscence which
emphasises Count Liitzow's devotion to the Czech cause.
When I was in Geneva in 19 15 the Count was also near in
Switzerland, and was closely watched by Austrian agents.
Desiring in no way to compromise him I kept aloof, but
I soon found out that the Count was in touch with our
agents who worked in Switzerland, and that he was
rendering them substantial financial support.

T. G. Masaryk.

Prague,

December i^th^ 19 19.

PREFACE

It is to me a subject of great satisfaction that a new edition of
my Bohemia: A?t Historical Sketch — first published in 1896 —
should be required. The study of Bohemian history is very
important, as that history is closely connected with the present
political situation of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and with the
demand for autonomy raised by the Bohemian people at the
present time. Without at least a slight knowledge of Bohemian
history it is impossible to understand the foundation of this
demand, and the contemptuous silence with which it is often
treated in Western Europe is largely founded on ignorance.

Of late years historical study has made rapid progress in
Bohemia, and a considerable number of statements and appre-
ciations contained in the first edition of this work have had to
be altered. All interested in Bohemian history are greatly
indebted to the valuable studies published in the Cesky Casopis
Historicky (Bohemian Historical Review), which is so ably
edited by Professors Goll and Pekdf. Though much new light
has been thrown on the past of Bohemia, no new history of the
country superseding Palacky's monumental work has appeared.
Recent research had indeed proved that the work of Palacky —
to whom many now accessible documents were unknown — is not
free from mistakes, yet it still remains precious. Professor
Rezek's plan of continuing Palacky's history, which ends in 1526,
up to 1620, and perhaps even further, remained unfulfilled in
cpnsequence of the illness and subsequent death of that brilliant
historian. Professor Bachmann ^ has recently published a
history of Bohemia. Written in German, it is more accessible to
English readers than books written in the national language of
Bohemia. The work is, however, imbued with a fierce hostility
to the Bohemian nation, and should be read with great caution.

While I have been able to introduce considerable alterations
and, I hope, improvements into this new edition of my book, I
have also made two important changes in the structure of my
work. In the first edition of Bohemia : An Historical Sketchy
the last chapter contained a brief account of Bohemian litera-
ture. I had not, fourteen years ago, given to that interesting
subject the amount of study which I have devoted to it of late
years. The result of these studies is contained in my History
of Bohemian Literature} This work can be considered as super-

^ I have briefly reviewed Professor Bachmann's work in the EttglUh
Historical Review {ox ^xAy 1906. 2 jgj. g^j 1899, 2nd ed. 1907.

A 2 «

X Preface

seding the last chapter of the first edition of Bohemia : An
Historical Sketch, and that chapter has therefore been omitted.

On the other hand, I have been frequently told that a history
of Bohemia which ends in 1620 must necessarily appear dis-
appointing to many readers. It is true that the year of the
battle of the White Mountain was long considered as the date
which marks the end of Bohemian independence and of the
ancient constitution. Yet, as Professor Rezek has ably pointed
out, it was only the treaty of Westphalia which rendered the
results of the battle of the White Mountain final. During the
Thirty Years' War it sometimes— for instance, during the Saxon
invasion in 1631 — appeared probable that the Bohemians would
again obtain autonomy and religious freedom. In 1648 only
did the Bohemians abandon all hope. Then only did Komensk^
(Comenius), the greatest exile and the greatest man of Bohemia,
address the Chancellor Oxenstierna in the despairing words :
" If there is no help from man, there will be help from God,
whose aid is wont to begin where that of men endeth."

It is also worthy of notice that the results of the battle of the
White Mountain have not in every way proved as final as they
would have appeared to one writing a century, or even fifty
years, ago. It has always been an axiom of the Bohemian
patriots that " as long as the language lives the nation is not
dead." In this respect at least the future of Bohemia is assured,
for never has the literature of the country been as extensive and
as valuable as at the present moment. The political position
of Bohemia also for a time seemed more satisfactory ; a certain
amount of autonomy was obtained ; little more than thirty years
ago an imperial decree promised the Bohemians the restoration
of their ancient constitution in a modified form.

The fact that the outlook for Bohemia is at the present
moment darker than it has been for many a year, does not
therefore deter me from devoting the last chapter of this work
to a brief outhne of the history of Bohemia from the year 1620
up to the present day. This has often been a matter of con-
siderable difficulty, as it is frequently not easy to fix the
boundary between those matters that belong to the general
history of Austria and Germany, and those that specially
concern Bohemia.

LtJTZOW.

Zampack,
October 1909.

PREFACE

TO THE FIRST EDITION

Many English visitors to my Bohemian home have
remarked to me on the absence of any history of my
country in the English language. German and Bohe-
mian (Cech) historians are numerous, and include many
who have written in the present century, since freedom
of writing and of research into archives have existed in
Austria. Most of these are valuable and trustworthy;
but I think I may lay claim to having compiled the first
narrative or sketch of Bohemian history in English
from original and other authorities.

My little work professes to be no more than a sketch,
and I have purposely selected this title for the volume.

I have, therefore, though briefly noticing the earliest
records of Bohemia, devoted most of my attention to
the period of the Hussite wars and of Bohemian
independence. Bohemia as an independent State prac-
tically ceased to exist after the battle of the White
Mountain (often, I think, called the battle of Prague
by English writers) in 1620; and at this point my
sketch of Bohemian history ceases.

But up to that date, the annals of Bohemia are full
of picturesque incident, and have considerable bearing
on the general development of Europe. In King John
Bohemia gives us the embodiment of mediaeval chivalry,
and its most remarkable crowned representative. The
religious questions that afterwards convulsed Europe
were first thrashed out in Bohemia, and John Hus
and his followers maintained and developed there the
ideas that were first broached by Wycliffe in England,
but for the time found little support in that reformer's
native country. These points are, I think, clearly
brought out. Political liberty and democratic principles,
unsuccessfully contended for as they were, receive some
of their earliest illustrations from Bohemian history.

xii Preface to the First Edition

The art of war also was early developed by the genius
of leaders such as Zizka and the two Prokops.

I have little space in my " Sketch " to deal ^ith
these matters, and I leave my readers and critics to
draw such conclusions from the facts narrated as they
think justified. Every effort has been made to reduce
the bulk of my narrative ; only those of my friends who
know the enormous mass of material in German, Latin,
and Bohemian to which I have had recourse, will be
able to gauge the labour involved in limiting the growth
of the book. The interest to me has grown as the work
has progressed, for the history of Bohemia, so little
known to English readers, may be regarded as a drama,
and even perhaps as a tragedy.

Though Bohemia has — undoubtedly to its ultimate
advantage — long formed part of the vast Empire now
known as Austria-Hungary, the country still retains a
language, a literature, and a history of its own. To
outline within the limits of a sketch some of these
elements of its interest is my sole object. Though I
have the materials, I have not the time nor opportunity
to write a history of Bohemia in English ; I only ask
my readers to judge of my book as being what it is — a
sketch of a great country's history.

My principal authorities are the numerous works
published during the present century in German and
Bohemian by Palacky, Jungmann, Tomek, Tieftrunk,
Ilelfert, Hofler, Rezek, Bilek, Goll, Gindely and many
others. I have endeavoured, by means of references
and notes, to mention as far as possible the authors to
whom I am indebted. An enumeration of all the works
consulted, which would of course include the older
authorities also, would have unduly lengthened the
book. Many points of Bohemian history being still
contested, I have been obliged to give in my foot-
notes longer and more numerous quotations than might
perhaps appear necessary. Readers who omit them will
yet be able to follow the general outline of the narrative.
Besides the modern writers mentioned above, I have
availed myself of the information contained in the
"Journal of the Bohemian Museum" {Casopis Musea
Ceskeho)y so rightly described by Mr. Morfill as "a
mine of Slavonic lore."

Preface to the First Edition xiii

The historians of the present century, who have had
access to many formerly unknown sources of informa-
tion, have to a considerable extent reconstructed the
history of Bohemia ; and many of the older writers have
to be studied with great caution. I have, however, not
entirely neglected to consult the old chroniclers, such
as Cosmas, Weitmil, Pulkava, Hajek, and many others.
The latter historians, Habernfeld, Skala and Slavata, are
still of the greatest value for the history of Bohemia,
and I have carefully studied their works. I have given
a short notice of some of the old historians of Bohemia
in the eighth chapter, which deals with the Hterature
of the country.

Though the purpose and scope of my book almost
appear to exclude original research, I was very glad of
the opportunity afforded me during a visit to Venice,
at the beginning of the year 1895, of examining some
of the documents referring to Bohemia preserved in
the State Archives at S> Maria de' Frari. I take this
occasion to thank Commendatore Stefani, Director of
these Archives, for his great attention, and I have been
able in several passages to refer to some of the more
interesting documents which I examined. I also wish to
express my thanks to the Hon. Madame Wiel, who has
very kindly assisted me in correcting the proofs of this
book, and to Messrs. Chapman & Hall, to whom I am
indebted for the two sketch-maps. 1

In Chapter VHI I have included a few notes on
matters that occurred to me in the course of a rather
extensive study of the old Bohemian writers, both in
6ech and in Latin. These notes have, of course, no
pretension to be considered as a history of ancient
Bohemian literature. I should in no case consider
myself as competent to undertake such a work, nor
would, I think, a large book on this subject be of much
interest to English readers. In the chapter of his work
on Slavonic Literature which treats of Bohemia, Mr.
Morfill has given a short but lucid and trustworthy
notice of all the more important Bohemian writers,
from the earliest period to the decline of the language

^ As these sketch-maps did not in my opinion add to the value of
my book, they have not been reproduced in the present edition.

XIV Preface to the First Edition

after the battle of the White Mountain. To this book
I can confidently refer my readers. Of other recent
English works on Bohemian literature, the Native
Literature of Bohemia in the Fourteenth Century, and
John Hus, both by the late Rev. A. H. Wratislavv, must
be mentioned as the best.

Bohemia is justly proud of her history, and I think
her recent historians, whether using the native or the
German language, have done credit to her greatness;
but to write even a sketch of Bohemian history requires
a thorough knowledge not only of the Bohemian, but
also of the English language. I am deeply conscious of
my shortcomings on this point. I am not writing in my
own language, and constant study of German and Bohe-
mian books has left its impress on my use of English in
writing. To numerous lapses from the most approved
methods of English writing I must beg my readers'
indulgence ; and this I do not without hope, seeing that
to some at least of them I am known personally, while
all will alike recognize the difficulties to which I thus
refer. I trust at all events that my meaning is clear,
even when I have had to struggle with the difficulty of
making it so.

I have added a chronological table giving the names
of the rulers (princes, afterwards kings) of Bohemia,
with the dates of their accessions and deaths.

The spelling of Bohemian (Slav) names presents con-
siderable difficulty, and even Cech writers are not agreed
on this matter. Though complete uniformity is perhaps
impossible, I have generally adopted the spelling now in
use. Names of towns, and especially of families, have
sometimes retained an older form of spelling, which I
have followed where I believed it to be in more general
use. Some towns also, where the nationality of the
population has varied at different times, possess German
and Bohemian names, both of which are still in use. In
all these cases I have without pedantry adopted the
designation that seemed to me the most intelligible to
English readers.

I must add one remark, which is only intended for
readers who are my countrymen, in the unlikely case
that this little book should come into their hands. In
no country has the habit of using the events of the past

Preface to the First Edition xv

as examples or arguments applicable to the political dis-
sensions of the present day prevailed so extensively as
in Bohemia. Nothing is to my mind more unscientific,
and indeed more reprehensible. I have exercised special
care in avoiding any remark which might have even the
appearance of an allusion to the religious or political
controversies in Bohemia at the present time.

LiJTzow.

Zampach^

December 1895.

The following is the list of Count LutzoVs works : —

Bohemia, an Historical Sketch, ist edition, 1896; A History of
Bohemian Literature, ist edition, 1899, 2nd edition, 1907 ; Prague
(Mediaeval Towns series), 1st edition, 1902, 2nd edition, 1907; "The
Labyrinth of the World," by Komensky (Comenius), Translated and
Edited by Count Ltitzow, ist edition, 1900, 2nd edition, 1902 ; The
Historians of Bohemia (being the Ilchester lectures for 1904), 1905 ;
The Life and Times of Master John Hus, 1909 ; and various articles
and reviews in English and Czech.

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGS

I. THE EARLIEST * INHABITANTS OF BOHEMIA (tO

THE YEAR 45 1 P.C.N.) .... I

II. FROM THE ARRIVAL OF THE CECHS IN BOHEMIA
TO THE DEATH OF PRINCE BOLESLAV II
(451-999) 7

IIL THE BOHEMIAN DUKES AND PRINCES (999-

II97) 24

IV. IHE BOHEMIAN KINGS FROM PREMYSL OTTOKAR
I TO THE DEATH OF JOHN OF LUXEM-
BURG (1197-1346) . ._ . .38

V. FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE REIGN OF
CHARLES IV TO THE CORONATION OF
^ KING SIGISMUND (1346-1420) . . 69

YI. FROM THE CORONATION OF SIGISMUND TO THE

DEATH OF KING LOUIS (1420-1526) . 1 29

VII. THE KINGS OF THE HOUSE OF HABSBURG UP
TO THE BATTLE OF THE " WHITE MOUN-
TAIN" (1526-1620) .... 202

VIII. THE KINGS OF THE HOUSE OF HABSBURG FROM
THE BATTLE OF THE " WHITE MOUNTAIN "
TO THE PRESENT DAY (1620-1910) . 279

INDEX 353

BOHEMIA

CHAPTER I

THE FIRST INHABITANTS OF BOHEMIA
(up to THE YEAR 43 1 )

Bohemia, now a part of the great Habsburg Empire,
has a history which is a record of much past greatness.
It is situated in the centre of the European continent, and
divided by high chains of mountains from the neighbouring
German countries — Prussia, Saxony, Bavaria, and Austria.
Only in the direction of the sister-land, Moravia, is there
no such mountainous frontier. Bohemia is inhabited by a
population the largest part of which, except in the earliest
times, has always been of the Slavonic race ; but aU the
surrounding countries, except Moravia, which is also mainly
Slavonic, are inhabited by Germans. Moravia has almost
always been under the same domination as Bohemia, and
the two countries were together known as the lands of the
Bohemian crown ; ^ though during the days of Bohemia's
greatness parts of Northern Germany and of the Slavonic
lands joining Bohemia were also governed from Prague.
The geographical position of Bohemia supplies to a great
extent the key to the history of that country. The great
chains of mountains which divide it from the neighbour-
ing German lands give Bohemia a separate and isolated
position. The country therefore forms a continent within
the continent of Europe, as Gothe has well expressed it.
This is, no doubt, one of the causes why the Slavonic race
has to a great extent retained its hold over Bohemia, whilst
the adjoining territories of Northern Germany, the popula-
tion of which was formerly Slavonic, have long since been
Germanized. Attempts were, however, always made by
the German princes and people to attain a similar result
in Bohemia also, and this struggle between rival races is the
leading feature in Bohemian history. Modern research has
proved that this idea dominates the many religious conflicts

^ Silesia and Lusatia were also at certain periods counted among the
lands of the Bohemian crown ; but their connection with Bohemia was
neither as close nor as lasting as that of Moravia.

2 Bohemia

in this country to a greater extent than would appear
from the writings of the old historians, who treat the
subject almost entirely from the point of view of religious
controversy.

In consequence of the geographical position of Bohemia
we find few references to that country in the old Greek
and Latin writers, and its earliest history is therefore very
obscure. According to a theory, whose origin can be
traced back as far as ^nseas Sylvius, and which will be
mentioned presently, Bohemia had first a Celtic and
then a Teutonic population. Recent research, founded, in
the absence of all historical evidence, on craniology and
archaeological research, has rendered it probable that at
least part of Bohemia had an autochthonous Slavic popula-
tion. Of the two great recent authorities on this difficult
subject Dr. Pic affirms that there were certainly Slavs in
Bohemia before the beginning of the Christian era, and Dr.
Niederle that Slavs can be traced as far back as the fifth
century before Christ. According to the formerly generally
accepted account, the earliest inhabitants of Bohemia were
the Boji, a branch of the Celtic race. Livy tells us that
in the time of the king Tarquinius Priscus, the Celtic king
Ambigatus in Gaul, finding it difficult, in consequence of his
age, to rule over the ever-increasing population, ordered his
nephews Sigoves and Belloves to lead a large part of the
people to other lands. The flight of birds was to decide
the direction of their travels, and according to it Sigoves set
out for the east and settled in the Hercynian forest, a district
that may be roughly identified with the present Bohemia.
This legend, though its historical truth has (at least, as far
as the date is concerned) been disproved by Niebuhr, is
evidently founded on old traditions of the Celtic druids.

We find few references to these earliest inhabitants of
Bohemia in the classical authors, and the first positive fact
concerning them that has come down to us dates from the
year 115 B.C. In that yenr the Cimbri left their homes in
the country that is now Southern Russia, and marched
westward through the present Galicia and Moravia, where
in a battle, the probable site of which was in North-eastern
Moravia, they were entirely defeated by the Boji. The
Cimbri, in consequence of this defeat, altered their li.ie of
march, and passing through the countries now knovm as
Styria, Switzerland, and France, entered Italy, This victory

An Historical Sketch 3

over an army that even Rome only defeated with great
difficulty, proves that the Boji were at that time a powerful
and warlike nation.

We next hear of the Boji in connection with Julius Caesar's
campaigns in Gaul. A certain number of Boji had joined
the Helvetii, who were also of Celtic race, in their attempt
to settle in Gaul. Though this attempt was frustrated by
C?esar's victory at Bibracte, the Boji were, at the request of
Caesar's allies, the Aedui, allowed to settle in their country.^
The evidence as to what number of Boji left their country
and settled in Gaul is contradictory. It seems probable,
however, that the nation was greatly weakened by this
emigration ; for it proved unable, ten years later, to resist
the Dacian king, Boerebistes, who ruled over the lands now
known as Transylvania and Hungary. He attacked them
in that part of their country now known as the Archduchy
of Austria, and defeated them in a battle which was probably
fought in the neighbourhood of the river Raab. The Boji
retreated to Bohemia, where Boerebistes does not seem to
have pursued them ; but he devastated the land he had
conquered so cruelly, that it was known long after as the
*' Bojian Desert." The empire of Boerebistes does not
seem to have survived his death ; but the Boji, weakened
by these unsuccessful wars, soon fell an easy prey to the
Germanic tribe of the Marcomanni.^

Opinions differ as to the original home of the Marcomanni,
though it seems most probable that they occupied lands
near the upper course of the river Oder, and that they after-
wards moved to Moravia and Upper Hungary. They were
on terms of friendship with Rome, as Marbod, a son of one
of their princes, was educated at the court of the Emperor
Augustus. A man of great talent and ambition, his natural
capacities as ruler and commander were developed by his
residence in the capital of the world. On his return to his
country he seized the sovereign power and organized his
army according to the Roman fashion. The country he
first attacked was that of the Boji, whom he seems to have
conquered without great difficulty (probably in the year 1 2

1 Caesar, Bell. Gall. i. 28.

^ Mommsen remarks {Rdvi. Geschichte^ iii. 243, 244) that there is no
historical evidence of the existence of the Marcomanni, as a separate
people, before Marbod's time ; the name may originally only have
meant what it etymologically signifies — ^frontier defenders ("march-
men ").

4 Bohemia

B.C.). He made their capital, Buiamum, his residence,
changing its name to Marobodum. From Bohemia, where
his position in consequence of the mountains and dense
forests which surrounded the country was very strong,
Marbod undertook the conquest of the neighbouring German
tribes, and appears to have become the chief of a powerful
empire. He, however, soon found a rival competitor in
Arminius, or Hermann, prince of the Cherusci, who by his
victory over the Romans in the Teutoburg forest had
delivered a great part of Germany from the Roman yoke.
Marbod had remained neutral during the struggle between
Rome and the German tribes led by Hermann, and had
thereby incurred great hostility among the Germans. War
soon broke out between the two chiefs — the first great war
between German tribes known to history. A great battle
was fought between the two armies in the country now known
as Saxony ; and, though the result was not decisive, Marbod
retired into Bohemia and invoked the aid of the Emperor
Tiberius. The Roman Emperor afforded him no aid,
though he sent his son Drusus to mediate between the
German princes ; and as the German tribes formerly subject
to Marbod now revolted against him, he soon lost all his
conquests except Bohemia. This country also he was not
destined to retain long. Kattwalda, prince of the Goths,
secretly encouraged by the Romans, entered Bohemia
(13 A.D.) with a large army, and by treachery possessed him-
self of Marbod's capital. Deserted by every one, Marbod
was obliged to seek refuge in Italy ; and, by permission of
the Emperor Tiberius, he took up his residence at Ravenna,
where he remained up to his death, eighteen years afterwards.
Tacitus mentions that in his time the speech was still in
existence in which the Emperor Tiberius expatiated on the
former greatness of Marbod's power, and on the means by
which he had been forced to surrender himself to Rome.^

Kattwalda was not destined to retain his conquest long.
After a reign of only two years he was driven from his
country by Vibilius, prince of the Hermunduri, whom the
Romans (always desirous to create dissensions among the
German tribes) had probably instigated. Kattwalda was
obliged to seek refuge with the Romans, but they would
not allow Vibilius to retain the land he had conquered.
Aided by Rome, Vannius, king of the Quadi, possessed
1 Taciliis, Annal. ii. 64.

An Historical Sketch 5

himself of the lands of the Marcomanni ; and that name,
which Marbod had rendered famous, now sinks into
obscurity. The Marcomanni, as well as the Quadi, fell
under the domination of other tribes, probably the Her-
munduri. All these tribes appear to have been to a certain
extent dependent on Rome ; and we read that the
Emperor Domitian, having demanded aid from Quadi and
Marcomanni in his war with Decebalus of Dacia and
receiving an unsatisfactory answer, caused their envoys to
be murdered and attacked their country (90).

During seventy-five years from this date we find no
historical mention of the tribes which inhabited Bohemia,
and only from the time of the beginning of the Marcomannic
war (a.d. 165) we find some slight mention of Bohemia and
the neighbouring countries. This war is known in history
as the Marcomannic war ; probably more because the namt
was better known to the Romans than those of other tribes
living further from the frontiers of the empire, than because
that tribe took a very prominent part in it. Numerous
tribes, whose partly-distorted names are recorded by the
Roman historians, and among whom we find mentioned the
Marcomanni and Quadi, driven southward by other —
probably Slavonic — tribes, simultaneously attacked the
Roman Empire. Only insufficient and contradictory
accounts of this great war have reached us. The Roman
Emperor, Marcus Aurelius, having defeated the German
tribes in several battles, formed the plan of incorporating
the lands of the Marcomanni and Quadi (that is to say, the
districts now known as Bohemia, Moravia, and Upper
Hungary) entirely with the Roman Empire. A great
insurrection in the east, however, obliged Marcus Aurelius
to renounce these plans and to conclude peace. Faithful
to the Roman system of separating the various German
tribes, the Emperor granted them peace under different
conditions ; and those imposed on the Marcomanni appear
to have been the hardest. They and the Quadi were
obliged to receive in their land and maintain a Roman
army of 20,000 men. The severity of this condition, and
the depredations committed by the Roman army of occupa-
tion, soon caused the Marcomanni to renew the war with
Rome. They were again defeated by the Emperor Marcus
Aurelius, but he was not able completely to conquer their
country ; and after his death the Emperor Commodus made

6 Bohemia

peace with the Marcomanm. The conditions were less
onerous than those of the former treaty. Though they
were to remain dependent on Rome, the land of the
Marcomanni was no longer to be occupied by a Roman
army. There can be no doubt that this long war had
greatly weakened the Marcomanni and diminished their
number. We find occasional mention of their name in
connection with those of the German tribes who, during
the reigns of the successors of Marcus Aurelius, invaded the
Roman Empire in every direction. They are mentioned as
having invaded the Roman territory dining the reigns of
the Emperors Caracalla, Alexander Severus, Maximinus,
Valerianus, Gallienas, Aurelian, Probus, Diocletian, and
(in ^^S) during the reign of the Emperor Julian. Hardly
any records of these expeditions, that seem to have been
undertaken more for the sake of plunder than of conquest,
have reached us. In the year 404 the German prince
Radagaisus attacked Italy at the head of a large army, to
which the Marcomanni sent a contingent. He was, how-
ever, defeated in the following year, and almost his whole
army perished on the battle-field. A great number of
Marcomanni also joined Godegisil, king of the Vandals, in
his expedition to Africa,

It is probable that only a scanty population now re-
mained in the lands near the Hercynian forest. The Mar-
comanni who had remained in their former abode were,
like the neighbouring tribes, imable to resist the attacks of
the Huns, and soon became subject to them. The last
notice concerning the Marcomanni which we find in history
tells us that they were among the Germans subject to
Attila, who formed part of the army with which he attacked
GauL They took part in the battle of the Catalaunian
fields, in which Attila was defeated, and it is probable that
most of the few remaining Marcomanni perished there.
Bohemia had after this battle probably but a small popula-
tion. The Celtic Boji and the Teutonic Marcomanni were
now, however, to have as successors Slavic tribes, of which
the Cechs were the most powerful. Though there may
have been an autochthorious Slavic population in Bohemia, it
was only then that the Cechs began to form the majority of
the population of Bohemia, as they have continued to do up
to the present day.

An Historical Sketch

CHAPTER II

FROM THE TIME OF THE OCCUPATION OF THE COUNTRY
BY THE BOHEMIANS (CECHS) TO THE DEATH OF PRINCE
BOLESLAV U (451-999),

As has already been mentioned, the Cechs, who after the
extinction of the Marcomanni settled in Bohemia, were a
branch of the great Slavonic race. It is probable that
the Slavs inhabited a large part of Eastern Europe from the
earliest historical times, though all attempts to identify the
lands they occupied are mere conjectures.

As Bohemia was henceforth to be inhabited by the
Slavonic race, it will be well to throw a glance on the
social and political condition of the Slavs at that period,
as far as the scanty records that have reached us render it
possible.

Of the religion of the ancient Slavs hardly anything is
known. The writers of the earUer part of the nineteenth
century, in the absence of all genuine records often relied
on documents that have since been proved to be forgeries.
Such were the so-called ]MSS. of Zelena Hora and Kralove
Dvur, and particularly the notes that were interpolated in
a genuine IMS. entitled the " ^Slater Verborum." It is to
the learned Mr. Patera, formerly Hbrarian of the Bohemian
Museum, that the discovery of the fraudulent insertions in
the " Mater Verborum" is due.

The earliest political institutions of the Slavs were of
the most primitive nature ; they appear when we first read
of them to have known neither princes nor nobles, and the
only existent authority was that of the starosta or elder of
each village. We hear that the Slavs in the earliest times
were less warlike than their Germanic neighbours, which
perhaps accounts for the absence of any military institu-
tions, and for the facilit}^ with which they were conquered
and partly extirpated by the Germans.

The great struggle known as the migration of nations,
forced the Slavs to imitate their neighbours by strengthen-
ing their organization. The Slavs of Bohemia were, at a
time which it is difficult to determine, divided into tribes,
each of which was ruled over by a chief named "voyvode."
The voyvode of the most important of these tribes, the
Cechs — a name which was gradually extended to all the

8 Bohemia

Slavonic tribes in Bohemia — appears to have exercised a
certain supremacy over the other voyvodes, and to have
been known as the knez (prince). When some of the tribes
increased in number the voyvodes divided them into several
zupa (districts), over each of which they appointed a zupan
(chief). The voyvodes, as well as the supreme voyvode or
knez, were elected by the members of their tribe ; but this
selection soon tended to become merely nominal, as it
became established that the choice should be limited to
members of certain powerful families.

The knez or prince, as well as the voyvodes and zupans,
seem to have united all civil and military authority in their
persons. The prince was judge over the whole people, and
the voyvodes and zupans acted in the same capacity with
regard to their tribe or district. These same chiefs were
also the leaders in time of war.

Hardly any record of the conquest of Bohemia by the
Cechs has reached us, and the date is also uncertain, though
it seems sure that this event occurred during the fifth
century .1 The modern Bohemian historians, Palacky and
Tomek, consider the year 451 the most probable date.
According to old legends, Cechus, or Cech, a noble of
Croatia ^), having committed homicide, fled from his country,
and with his companions sought a new abode in Bohemia.
Old traditions tell us that Cechus and his followers, after
having crossed three rivers,^ first fixed their abode on the
mountain Rip (Georgsberg, mountain of St. George), a hill
near R6udnice, overlooking the Elbe.

Scarcely anything is known to us of the history of the
Cechs in the earliest times after their settlement in Bohemia.
The old legends referring to this time tell us of numerous
wars with the neighbouring German tribes, probably the
Thuringians and the Franks, and already show a spirit of
racial hatred against the western neighbours.

At some period in the sixth century the Bohemians, or
Cechs,^ became tributary to the Avares, a tribe of Asiatic

^ See, however, p. 2, where I have mentioned that there was
probably a Slavic population in some parts of Bohemia long before
this period.

* The situation of this Croatia is very uncertain. It may have been
the present Austrian province of Galicia.

^ Many not very successful attempts have been made by Bohemian
historians to identify these three rivers.

* The Bohemian historians, when writing in German, always designate

An Historical Sketch 9

origin, which, having conquered Hungary, now began to
invade Western Europe. Nothing is known either as
regards the duration or the extent of the domination of the
Avares over Bohemia. Recent research has, however,
proved that their power was greater in Pannonia (which
roughly corresponds to the present Hungary) than in
Bohemia. It is not even certain that the Avares ever
permanently occupied Bohemia, where no archseological
traces of their sojourn have been found. It is, however,
certain that they frequently plundered and ravished the
country.^ The old German chronicles tell us that in the
year 623 Samo, who probably belonged to one of the
Slavonic tribes that then inhabited Northern Germany,
aided the Bohemians in their struggle against the Avares,
and that with his help they succeeded in freeing their country
from alien domination.

The grateful Bohemians chose Samo as their king, and
he is said to have been the founder of the first great Slavonic
State. Bohemia was the centre of his dominions, and
Samo's residence was traditionally believed to have been
the castle of the Vysehrad.'^'

The formation of this great Slavonic State excited the
jealousy of Dagobert, king of the Franks, and he invaded
the lands of Samo in several directions. His main army
was, however, defeated in a great battle fought at Wogastis-
burg (probably near the present town of Cheb),^ which lasted
three days. After this victory Samo is said to have still
further extended his dominions. He appears to have lived
up to the year 658.

From this date up to nearly the end of the eighth century
the history of Bohemia is a complete blank, and our only
authority for this period is Cosmas of Prague, who lived
four centuries later, and whose writings deserve the name of
fairy-tales more than that of history.* These tales, un-

their countrymen as Bohemians, not Cechs ; and I shall henceforth
follow their example.

^ This has been clearly shown by Dr. Niederle in the Cesky Casopis
Historick (Bohemian Historical Journal) for 1909, p. 345-349.

2 A hill near Prague, now incorporated with that town.

' In German Eger.

* The modern Bohemian historians Palack/ and Tomek quote the so-
called MSS. of Zelena Hora and Kralove Dvur as authorities for this
period. Recent research has proved that they are forgeries dating
from the beginning of the nineteenth century.

lo Bohemia

doubtedly founded on old traditions, have remained widely
popular in Bohemia, so that it may be well briefly to notice
them. Cosmas tells us that the Bohemian prince Krokus
(or Krok), whom he calls the first ruler over the country,
had three daughters, Kazi, Teta (or Lethka), and Libussa.
Kazi, the eldest, was equal to the Colchian Medea in her
knowledge of medicine and poisons ; whilst the second,
Teta, was learned in religious rites, and taught the ignorant
people to worship Oreades, Dryades, and Hamadryades.^
"The Third (sister), smaller in the number of years but
greater in wisdom, was called Libussa . . . she was a
wonderful woman among women ; chaste in body, righteous
in her morals, second to none as judge over the people,
affable to all and even amiable, the pride and glory of the
female sex, doing wise and manly deeds ; but as nobody is
perfect, this so praiseworthy woman was, alas, a soothsayer." ^
Libussa, though the youngest of the three sisters, was chosen
by the people to be their ruler ; whether in consequence of
her many qualities that he enumerates, Cosmas does not tell
us. Libussa reigned for some time over the people, and is said
to have founded the city of Prague at the foot of the
Vysehrad, and to have foretold its future greatness.

At length, however, the Bohemians became discontented
with female rule, and w^hen Libussa was judging a dispute
betw^een two nobles, the one against whom she decided
insulted her, and said that his country was the only one
that endured the shame of being ruled over by a woman.
Libussa then said to the people that she saw they were too
ferocious to be ruled over by a woman. She begged them
to disperse, and on the following day to choose a man to
rule over them ; whomsoever they might choose she
promised to take as a husband. The people replied by
asking her to choose a husband, whom they would acknow-
ledge as their prince. Libussa consented, and on the
following day said to the assembled people, pointing to
the distant hills, " Behind these hills is a small river called
Belina, and at its bank a farm called Stadic. Near that
farm is a field, and in that field your future king is plough-
ing with two oxen marked with various spots. His name

1 Under these classical denominations Cosmas evidently designated
the Rusalky or fairies, in whose existence the heathen Bohemians
believed.

2 Cosmas, Prageiisis Chronica Bohemortini^ pp. 2, 3.

An Historical Sketch ii

is Pfemysl, and his descendants will reign over you for
ever. Take my horse and follow him ; he will lead you to
the spot." The people chose several out of their number,
who immediately set out, and following the guidance of
Libussa's horse reached the place described by her, and
there found a peasant, whose name they ascertained to be
Pfemysl, ploughing his field. They immediately saluted
him as their prince, and conducted him to the castle on
the Vy^ehrad, where he was married to Libussa, and seated
on the princely throne. Modern Bohemian historians
assert that Pfemysl was the voyvode of the Lemuzes, one
of the tribes into which Bohemia was then divided ; and
they have also made various not very successful attempts to
identify the locality where he was found. According to
the old traditions, Pfemysl was a great law-giver; and in
later times all the most ancient laws and regulations were
attributed to him.

Beginning with Pfemysl, the ancient Bohemian chroniclers
have constructed a regular genealogical table, and his
successors in the male line ruled over Bohemia for more
than five centuries (up to 1306); whilst the Habsburg
dynasty, now reigning over Bohemia, also descends from
him in the female line. Nothing except their names,i not
even the length of their reigns, is known of the first
successors of Pfemysl ; though Hajek of Libocan, and other
Bohemian writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
give long but entirely imaginary accounts of their reigns.

Towards the end of the eighth century the German
chroniclers again begin to throw some light on the events
that occurred in Bohemia. Ever since the beginning of the
greatness of the Carlovingian dynasty these sovereigns had
attempted to extend their power in Eastern Germany ; and
had succeeded in subduing not only the Saxons, but also
some of the Slavonic tribes that then inhabited a large
part of North-eastern Germany.

The Slavonic tribes of the Obotrites, Wiltes, and Sorbes —
whose dwelling-places may be roughly identified with Meck-
lenburg, Brandenburg, and Saxony — were successively
overcome by the Carlovingian monarchs, especially by
Charles the Great. As was inevitable, Bohemia, which in
so many directions joined the lands he had conquered, also

^ These names will be found in the list of sovereigns of Bohemia
contained at the end of this volume.

12 Bohemia

attracted the ambition of the great Emperor ; particularly
after that his coronation in Rome (8co) had, according to
the then prevalent ideas, invested him with supreme power
over Western Europe.

There are no historical records as to the direct cause
which induced Charles the Great to attempt the conquest of
Bohemia; we only learn from contemporary German
chroniclers that he (805) attacked that country from several
directions, the main army being commanded by the
Emperor's son Charles. The campaign does not appear to
have been a successful one, nor do the Germans seem to
have remained long in Bohemia. It is, however, probable
— though evidence is very contradictory — that Bohemia
became to a certain extent tributary to the Carlovingian
monarchs. Should the Bohemians then have consented to
pay a tribute, we have every reason for supposing that such
payments only took place during the lifetime of Charles the
Great, and not during the reigns of his successors. During
the intestine disturbances, which broke out in the empire of
the Franks after the death of Charles the Great, his suc-
cessors were too much occupied to think of attempting any
new attack on their Slavonic neighbours. It was only after
the treaty of Verdun (843) that the Bohemians again had to
defend their independence against the Germans. By the
partition which had been agreed on at Verdun, Louis, sur-
named the German, had become ruler of Germany, and, as
such, heir to the claims of supremacy over the neighbour-
ing Slavonic tribes. It was not, however, against Bohemia
that he first turned his arms, but against the sister-land,
Moravia.

The earliest history of Moravia, up to the beginning of
the ninth century, is involved in even more complete
obscurity than that of Bohemia. We have, however, every
reason to believe that in those days it shared the fate of that
country ; that it was conquered by the Avares, then liberated
by Samo ; and that it formed part of his empire.

About the middle of the ninth century Moravia was
governed by Mojmir, who, from the scanty record that has
reached us, appears to have been a ruler of great ability.
He united the scattered tribes under his dominion, and was
the real founder of the great Moravian Empire, which for
some time included Bohemia also. In 846 Louis " the
German " sent a large army into Moravia, and appointed

An Historical Sketch 13

Mojmir's nephew, Rostislav, ruler of the land. Moravia
having been forced to acknowledge German supremacy, the
German army now attacked Bohemia. The Bohemians,
however, were successful in their resistance, and defeated
the invading army. From this time forth war raged be-
tween Germany and Bohemia for thirty years. The vague
and contradictory reports of battles that have reached us
are of no interest to English readers. It is of more interest
to turn our attention to an event of immense importance
to Bohemia that occurred about this time, namely, the
conversion of the country to Christianity.

It is probable that Christianity penetrated into Moravia
earlier than into Bohemia, and Palacky gives documentary
evidence that as early as the year 836 a Christian church
was consecrated at Neutra in Moravia by the Archbishop of
Salzburg. In 884 we read that fourteen Bohemian nobles
appeared at the court of King Louis "the German" at
Regensburg, and that they were baptized on the ist of
January, 845. It is very probable that these nobles had
been obliged to fly from Bohemia in consequence of one
of the many feuds that then desolated the country, and that
they hoped by accepting the Christian faith to secure
German aid against their internal enemies.

Christianity introduced through the agency of Germany
was not likely to gain many adherents, as the Christian faith
was necessarily in the eyes of the Bohemians connected
with the hostile German race. It was from the east that
Christianity completely and permanently penetrated into
Moravia and Bohemia. In 862 the Moravian Prince
Rostislav, who, though invested with sovereignty by the
Germans had soon renewed the national feuds with them,
sent a mission to the court of the Greek Emperor at Con-
stantinople, asking him to send Christian teachers of the
Slavonic race to Moravia.

The envoys thus addressed Michael, the then ruler of the
Eastern empire : " Our people have rejected paganism and
already observe Christian law. But we have no teachers
who can in our own language teach us the true Christian
faith, so that other countries, seeing this, may follow our
example. Send then, O Emperor, such a bishop or teacher,
you from whom all good law proceeds." ^ It is probable

i Dr. Pastruck, Dejiny Slovanskych apostohi Cyrilla a Melhoda
(History of the Slavic apostles Cyrillus and Methodius).

14 Bohemia

that these simple words, as noted in the legend, express the
true purpose of Rostislav. The mission had, however,
undoubtedly also a political purpose. Rostislav and his uncle
intended to form a great Moravian empire independent of
the Franks, and for this purpose to free themselves from the
Frankish hierarchy; for the German priests in Moravia
endeavoured to serve the interests of their race, as well as
those of their religion.

The emperor Michael received the envoys favourably and
selected two priests, the brothers Constantine and Metho-
dius, to accompany them to Moravia. " You are," he said,
"citizens of Solun,^ and the citizens of Solun generally
speak pure Slavic."

We read that when the brothers stai ted on their journey
Constantine brought with him a translation of the Bible
written in the language of the Slavic inhabitants of Mace-
donia. For this translation Constantine used the letters of
the new alphabet, which he had himself invented, and
which from the name he afterwards assumed became known
as the Cyrillic alphabet. It renders with great precision the
sounds peculiar to Slavic languages, and it is still largely
used in Eastern Europe. This event is undoubtedly of
great importance. Not only did the Slavic language thus
become a written one, but by its use in religious services
it took its position with Latin and Greek as a liturgic
language.

Ihe undertaking of the saintly brothers was fully success-
ful. Numerous churches were built, and the inhabitants
of Moravia eagerly flocked to the religious services, which
were held in the Slavonic tongue. The fame of the new
preachers spread beyond the borders of Moravia, and the
Slavonic inhabitants of the adjoining districts of Pannonia
(Hungary) also accepted the teaching of Constantine and
Methodius.

It seems more than probable that the German priests,
and particularly the Archbishop of Salzburg, to whose
diocese these lands belonged, regarded the brothers as
intruders, and attempts were repeatedly made to denounce
them to the Holy See as heretics. These attempts were
favoured by the Eastern origin of Constantine and Metho-
dius. It became known that they had, while at Constanti-
nople, enjoyed the favour of the patriarch Photius, through
^ The present Salonike.

An Historical Sketch 15

whose influence the schism between the Eastern and
Western Church took place. It should, however, be noted
that the brothers, from the time of their arrival in Moravia,
always sided entirely with the Church of Rome.

To justify their conduct before the Pope, the brothers pro-
ceeded on their first journey to Rome. Constantine, shortly
after their arrival there, feeling his end approaching, entered
a monastery and there assumed the name of Cyrillus, by
which he is generally known. He died a few weeks after-
wards. Shortly afterwards Methodius left Rome and
proceeded for a short time to Pannonia, on a visit to Kocel,
the prince of that country, who had requested the Pope to
send him a priest who was acquainted with the Slavic
language. After a short stay in Hungary, Methodius re-
turned to Rome to report to the Pope on the success of
his mission. He then returned to Moravia, where he con-
tinued almost up to the end of his life to be subject to the
persecutions of the German priests. During a third visit to
Rome, Methodius obtained from the Pope the title of
Archbishop of Moravia and Pannonia, and the formal recog-
nition of the Cyrillic alphabet.^

Though we have no direct evidence to the purpose, it
seems highly probable that the differences between the
German and Slavonic priests were in some sort of connec-
tion with the ever-recurring hostilities between Germany
and Moravia. In 864 and 868 we again find the armies of
the German King Louis attacking the domains of Prince
Rostislav, who received assistance from the Bohemians.
These wars, in which the Germans do not appear to have
been successful, were ended by a treaty ; but Rostislav's
downfall, which the Germans had so long vainly attempted
to achieve, was at last brought about by treachery. Rosti-
slav's nephew, Svatopluk, who governed the district of
Neutra under the supremacy of his uncle, allied himself
with the Germans. He succeeded in making his uncle
prisoner, and delivered him over to Carlomann, son of the
German King Louis (870).

^ Dr. Pastruck's book, to which I have already referred, renders it
certain that Methodius in no way opposed the dogma of the Roman
Church. It also proves that the attitude of the Pope towards Methodius
was a somewhat ''opportunist" one, perhaps based on the desire to
found a Romanist Church with Slavic rites in opposition to the schis-
matic Photius.

i6 Bohemia

Immediately afterwards Carlomann entered Moravia, con-
quered the whole country, and appointed two brothers. Mar-
graves of Austria, its governors. The German governors
seized the Archbishop Methodius, and delivered him as
prisoner to his enemies the German bishops. Shortly after-
wards they caused Svatopluk also, whose fidelity they
mistrusted, to be imprisoned and sent to Germany. He
appears to have ingratiated himself with the German con-
querors ; for when an insurrection broke out in Moravia,
shortly afterwards, he was appointed leader of the German
army sent to suppress it.

Svatopluk now requited by treachery the treachery that
had been used against him. Deserting the Germans, he
put himself at the head of his countrymen, and defeated the
Germans in a decisive battle in which both the Austrian
Margraves fell (871). Svatopluk, now uncontested lord of
Moravia, tried to strengthen his power against the Germans
(who were certain again to attack him) by an alliance with
the Bohemian Prince Bofivoj — a relation of whom, probably
a sister, he subsequently married. The relative positions of
Bohemia and Moravia at this period are very uncertain ;
but it is probable that when Svatopluk's power increased
Bofivoj became to a certain extent subject to him.

The following year (872) the Germans again attacked
both Bohemia and Moravia ; and though they succeeded
in penetrating into Bohemia, they were on the whole un-
successful. After Svatopluk had in the following year
carried the war into the enemies' country by attacking
Carlomann in Germany, his father, King Louis, who had
come to his aid, considered it wiser to enter into negotia-
tions for peace. These negotiations resulted in the treaty
of Forcheim (874), which was favourable to Svatopluk, and
secured to him the possession of his conquests in Northern
Hungary, though under German supremacy.

After this treaty Methodius was released from custody,
and returned to Moravia. One of his first deeds after his
return was probably the baptism of the Bohemian Prince
Borivoj ; both the locality and the exact date of this im-
portant event are uncertain.^ At the same time Bofivoj 's

^ The legend that Borivoj became a Christian because, dining with
Svatopluk, he was requested to sit apart on a low stool, since he, being
a heathen, was unfit to sit at table with Christians, is of recent origin,
and is treated with contempt by modem Bohemian historians.

An Historical Sketch 17

wife, Ludmilla, was also received into the Christian Church ;
and the example she set by her saintly life greatly aided the
rapid spread of Christianity in Bohemia. Bofivoj is said to
have built several churches : the one at Levy Hradec, near
Prague, is specially mentioned as having been built by
him, and is the oldest Christian church in Bohemia.^ The
earliest church on the Hradcany hill at Prague is also
believed to have been built during the reign of Bofivoj.

In 885 Methodius, "the apostle of the Slavs," died. The
numerous legends which supply almost all the evidence
concerning him give a very touching account of his
death.

Svatopluk of Moravia, after having secured for his country
independence from Germany, extended his dominion in all
directions, and he soon became the chief of a mighty
Slavonic empire. It is equally difficult to specify the limits
of his dominion, and the names and number of the minor
Slav States that acknowledged his supremacy. We are told
that Cracow and the surrounding part of Poland, Silesia, a
large part of Northern Germany reaching as far as Magde-
burg, and a large part of Northern Bohemia, had probably
long before acknowledged his supremacy; but after Bofivoj's
death, Svatopluk only recognized his sons Spytihnev and
Vratislav as local chieftains (voyvodes) over certain districts,
and himself became supreme ruler over Bohemia, thus
temporarily effacing the dynasty of Pfemysl.

Hostilities between the Germans and the Slavs were
renewed not many years after the treaty of Forcheim. In
890 Svatopluk was involved in a great war with the German
King Arnulph, an illegitimate son of Carlomann. In 892
Arnulph obtained aid from the wild Magyars or Hungarians,
who had then recently appeared in Europe, and whose
dwelling-place at that period probably was the present
Moldavia.

Svatopluk successfully resisted these various attacks, but
the greatness of the Moravian Empire ended with his death
(894). The quarrels between two of Svatopluk's sons,
Mojmir and Svatopluk, hastened the ruin of the country.
The Bohemian Prince Spytihnev seized the opportunity,
which the intestine struggles in Moravia afforded him, for
the purpose of shaking off Moravian supremacy and re-

^ This church is still in existence, but was considerably altered in the
fifteenth century.

1 8 Bohemia

establishing the rule of the dynasty of Premysl over the
whole of Bohemia.

To strengthen himself against Moravia, Spytihnev sought
the alliance of Germany ; and he and his brother Vratislav
appeared at Regensburg, at the court of the German King
Arnulph, imploring his aid. Taking into account the close
connection then existing between political and ecclesiastical
affairs, it seems certain that the Bohemians accepted the
supremacy of the Bishop of Regensburg, and with it the
Latin liturgy. The Slavonic liturgy, however, also con-
tinued side by side with the Latin one : and we find
evidence even late in Bohemian history that the memory
of the original Eastern origin of Christianity in the country
remained unforgotten among the people.

Whilst Germans and Slavs were exhausting their forces
in constantly-recurring struggles, the new Asiatic tribe, which
the Germans had originally called in to their aid, had
widely extended its power. The Germans and Slavs now
made common cause against the Magyars ; but in a great
battle which took place at Presburg (907) they were totally
defeated. The Magyars now ravaged Germany and the
neighbouring Slavonic lands with impunity. About the
time of this great battle — the exact date cannot be ascer-
tained in the complete absence of contemporary evidence —
the Magyars entirely conquered Moravia, which remained
in their power for more than half a century ; only a small
western district fell to Bohemia.

" The invasion of the Magyars and their establishment in
Hungary is one of the most important events in the history
of Europe ; it is the greatest misfortune that has befallen
the Slavonic world during thousands of years. The
Slavonic races in the ninth century extended from the
frontiers of Holstein to the coast of the Peloponnesus, much
divided and disconnected, varying in habits and circum-
stances, but everywhere able, diligent, and capable of
instruction. In the middle of this extended line a centre
had been formed by Rostislav and Svatopluk, round which,
both by inner impulse and through the force of external
circumstances, the other Slavonic tribes would have grouped
themselves." 1

In the complete absence of contemporary records it is
impossible to ascertain how Bohemia escaped the fate that
1 Palack^.

An Historical Sketch 19

befell Moravia. The ability of the princes of the house of
Premysl, who then ruled over Bohemia, may have largely
contributed to preserve the country from the Magyar invaders.
Old legends tell us that Vratislav, who about this time
succeeded his brother Spytihnev, was a glorious prince, so
that we may infer that he was successful in defending the
country against its numerous enemies. Vratislav died about
the year 920/ and after his death dissensions arose in the
reigning family. Vratislav left three sons — Venceslas,
Boleslav, and Spytihnev, the last of whom died in early
youth. The widow of Vratislav, Drahomira of Stodor,
daughter of a prince of the still heathen tribe of the Lutices
(in the present Lusatia), assumed the guardianship over her
two other sons. She is described to us as a proud and
imperious woman, who soon became jealous of the influence
of her mother-in-law, the saintly Ludmilla, who had educated
Prince Venceslas in the Christian faith. She sent murderers
to the castle of Tetin, whither Ludmilla had retired, and
these, finding her kneeling at prayers, strangled her with
her own veil (921). Ludmilla was afterwards canonized as
a saint of the Catholic Church.

The regency of Drahomira did not prove advantageous to
the country. Bohemia was soon involved in war with Henry
the Fowler, the great king who was then reigning over
Germany. King Henry had recently subdued many of the
Slavonic tribes in the region of the upper Elbe. It is
probable that Drahomira incurred his hostility by assisting
these tribes, to one of which — the Lutices — she herself
belonged ; or Henry the Fowler may have considered his
victories incomplete, as long as he had not subdued the
Slavonic Bohemians also.

Though hostilities had probably begun before, it was in
928 that King Henry entered Bohemia with a large army
and advanced as far as Prague. Venceslas, who by this time
had assumed the government of the country, felt the im-
possibility of resisting the German power, and a peaceful
settlement was agreed to. Venceslas consented to pay an
annual tribute of six hundred marks of silver and one
hundred and twenty head of cattle. Venceslas, according
to the contemporary records, appears to have been a peaceful
and pious prince. We are told that he spent a great part
of the night in prayers, and that he was in the habit of him-

^ The chronology of Bohemia is at this time still very uncertain.

20 Bohemia

self cutting off the wheat and grapes that the priests required
to prepare the holy wafers and the wine for the sacrament.
His great generosity to churches seems to have caused dis-
content among some of the nobles ; and the ambition of
Venceslas's younger brother Boleslav induced him to become
the head of a conspiracy against the prince. Wenceslas
had the pious habit of attending the anniversaries of the
foundation of churches — posviceni, as they are called in
Bohemia — in every part of his dominions, and on the
invitation of his brother he repaired for a festivity of this
description to Stara Boleslav, where Boleslav then resided.

On his way to early mass on the 28th of September, 935,
Wenceslas was attacked by his brother and other con-
spirators, and murdered after a brave defence. Wenceslas
was canonized by the Catholic Church, and the 28th of
September is still one of the great religious festivals of
Bohemia.

Boleslav, surnamed the Cruel, now became sovereign of
Bohemia. He was "one of the most powerful monarchs
that ever occupied the Bohemian throne." ^ He greatly
extended the frontiers of the country, and also consolidated
it internally. His reign began with a renewal of the inter-
mittent but ever-recurring war against Germany. Probably
King Henry considered the murder of his ally Wenceslas as
a sufficient reason for resuming hostilities.

Henry died before he had had time to open the cam.paign ;
but in 938 the powerful king and emperor Otho I, who
succeeded him, sent two armies into Bohemia. Though the
records of this war are very obscure, it seems probable that
Boleslav succeeded in defending his country against the
invaders, at least for a time; it is also reported that he
succeeded in subduing some of the Bohemian nobles who
had allied themselves with the national enemy. War now
continued between the two countries with varying success,
but few details concerning this struggle have reached us.
We read that in 946 the Bohemian prince sent hostages
to Otho ; but this evidently does not indicate a decisive
victory of the Germans, for in 950 Otho himself entered
Bohemia with a great army. Boleslav, seeing that his
forces were insufficient to resist the whole power of the
victorious Emperor, consented again to pay the tribute
which Wenceslas had promised. Boleslav henceforth lived
1 Palacky.

An Historical Sketch 21

on peaceful terms with his western neighbours, attempting
rather to extend his dominion in the direction of the east.

In the year 955 we find the Bohemians as allies of the
German monarch. The Magyars, or Hungarians, who
ever since the battle of Presburg had almost annually
ravaged Western Europe, in that year attacked Germany
with greater force than before. They were, however,
signally defeated in a great battle near Augsburg — one of
the most sanguinary and decisive battles fought during the
Middle Ages. A Bohemian contingent of a thousand men
formed part of the victorious army, but Boleslav himself,
with the greater part of his troops, remained to guard the
frontiers of Bohemia. The defeated Hungarian army,
having attempted to force a passage through Bohemia, was
completely defeated by Boleslav, who took the Hungarian
leader, Lehel, prisoner.

We have very little information as to the successful wars
that filled up the later years of the reign of Boleslav. Only
a list of the lands which he conquered has reached us. He
probably, soon after his victory over the Hungarians,
succeeded in freeing Moravia from their domination and
in uniting it with Bohemia. We learn that Boleslav also
conquered a large part of the present Hungary — the wide
lands between the Carpathian mountains and the Danube.

The country north of the Carpathian mountains, then
known as Croatia,^ is also included among the countries
then subject to the Bohemian princes ; but we have little
knowledge whether the conquests in this country were made
by Boleslav I, or by his son. It is, however, certain that the
possessions of Boleslav I at this period joined the territory of
the Polish dukes, and amicable relations were established
between the two princes. Boleslav married his daughter
Dubravka to the Polish Duke Mieceslav I, and her influence
over her husband induced that still heathen prince to accept
the Christian faith. His conversion was soon followed by
that of his subjects.

Boleslav I died in 967, and was succeeded by his son
Boleslav II, surnamed the Pious. It seems probable that
the natural detestation that the old chroniclers felt for one

1 This Croatia, the extant and geographical position of which is very
uncertain, must not be confused with the present Croatia. It was
probably situated in the lands north of the Carpathians now known as
Galicia.

22 Bohemia

who had obtained the throne by the murder of his brother
induced them somewhat to praise Boleslav II at the
expense of his father, and to attribute to him conquests
that had already been made by Boleslav I. It is certain
that early in the reign of Boloslav II we find the Bohemian
frontiers more widely extended than at any other time, even
during the reigns of Ottokar II and Charles IV.

Besides Bohemia itself, Moravia, a large part of Hungary
stretching from the Carpathians to the Danube, the greater
part of Silesia including Breslau, wide districts of Poland
reaching nearly up to the town of Lemberg, and touching
the frontiers of the Russian rulers of Kiew, were subject to
Boleslav II.

The great power acquired by Boleslav allowed him to
assume a more independent attitude towards the German
kings ; and ecclesiastical affairs then being so intimately con-
nected with the political situation, he now endeavoured to
render the Bohemian Church less dependent on Germany.

On the occasion of an interview with the Emperor Otho
(973), Boleslav obtained his consent to the separation of
Bohemia, and the wide lands then incorporated with it,
from the diocese of Regensburg. Prague was to become
the seat of a bishopric: and the Pope gave his consent,
though under the express conditions that the new bishopric
was not to be considered a continuation of the old Moravian
archbishopric, and that the liturgy should be the Latin, not
the Slavonic one, which still had many adherents in the
country. The Bohemian bishopric was also placed under
the supremacy of the German archbishops of Maintz. On
the proposal of Boleslav, Thietmar, a German who had
long lived in Bohemia and was thoroughly versed in the
language of the country, was, by the clergy, the nobles, and
the people, elected first bishop of Prague (973).

Thietmar only lived nine years after his election, and
Adalbert or Voytech, a Bohemian noble, son of the voyvode
of Libitz, was then chosen as bishop. It was through the
efforts of Adalbert that Christianity was finally estabhshed
in Bohemia ; for the German priests of the diocese of
Regensburg, to which the country had formerly belonged,
had made little impression on the people, whose language
they mostly did not understand.

Adalbert, however, found the ruling of his extensive
diocese very difficult, and his efforts to extirpate polygamy

An Historical Sketch 23

and other still-prevailing heathen customs unsuccessful.
Becoming discouraged, he obtained permission to retire to
Rome, where he entered a convent ; but he returned to
Bohemia three years later on the urgent request of Prince
Boleslav. Adalbert, however, later again left Bohemia in
consequence of a feud with other nobles, in which his
brothers had become involved, and in which Boleslav had
taken the part of their enemies. The castle of Libitz, to
which Adalbert's brothers had retired, was stormed, and
they were put to death by order of Boleslav. Adalbert
himself died as a martyr (997) during a journey in the
country of the heathen Prussians, whom he had attempted
to convert to the Christian faith.

The reigns of Boleslav I and II are memorable for the
great centralization of the sovereign power which was
achieved by these princes. It has been mentioned ^ that
the Bohemian princes originally only governed directly a
certain part of the country — the centre of which was
probably the castle of the Vysehrad near Prague — and that
they only exercised a certain ill-defined supremacy over the
voyvodes who ruled the other parts of Bohemia. This
organization, or rather absence of organization, had led to
innumerable feuds among the voyvodes, as well as to con-
stant revolts on their part against the prince. The Bohemian
historians, referring to this period, give numerous de-
scriptions of these small intestine wars, which have been
omitted here as being of no interest to English readers.

Boleslav I and II succeeded in successfully subduing
these local rulers; and after the death of the lords of
Libitz, mentioned above, there was no hereditary voyvode
in Bohemia except the prince. Bohemia was henceforth
only divided into districts (zupa), at the head of each of
which a zupan (burgrave) appointed by the prince was
placed.

These government officials soon formed a new nobility,
which gradually took the place of the old territorial nobles
or voyvodes. During the powerful reigns of the two first
Boleslavs the princely authority was greatly strengthened,
and the assemblies or Diets which still took place ended
by having a merely nominal character ; their purpose was
rather to hear the prince's will than to formulate the
wishes of the people.

^ See page 9.

24 Bohemia

Boleslav II died in 999, and with him for a time also the
greatness of his country, which rapidly declined during the
rule of his successors.

CHAPTER III

THE BOHEMIAN PRINCES FROM THE DEATH OF BOLESLAV II
TO THE ACCESSION OF PREMYSL OTTOKAR I (999-II97)

The great Bohemian Empire of Boleslav II, like most
Slavonic States at that and even later periods, was not
destined to be of long duration. As after the death of
Vratislav I of Bohemia and Svatopluk of Moravia, dissen-
sions in the reigning family were the first cause of the
decline of the country. Boleslav II had three sons —
Boleslav III, who succeeded him, Jaromir, and Ulrich.

Boleslav III is described as being cruel, avaricious, and
distrustful. An old chronicler^ tells us that he "vice
basilisci noxii regnans populum ineffabiliter constrinxit."
The dissensions between Boleslav and his brothers appear
to have begun immediately after their father's decease ; and
in the very year of the death of Boleslav II (999) the
Polish Prince Boleslav, surnamed Chrobri (the Brave), son
of the Bohemian Princess Dubravka, invaded the territories
of his brother-in-law. Boleslav (the Brave), first attacked
and stormed Cracow; the Bohemian garrison of which
town was slaughtered after a brave defence. We are told
that in the almost incredibly short period of one year
Boleslav the Brave also conquered Moravia, Silesia, and
the whole dominion over which Boleslav II had reigned,
with the exception of Bohemia itself. Poland now for a
time took the place of Bohemia as the great West-Slav
power.

Boleslav III, entirely occupied by the internal divisions
of Bohemia, seems to have made little or no effort to defend
the dominion to which he had succeeded. Having driven
his two brothers out of Bohemia, he hoped now to reign
uncontestedly ; but the Bohemian nobles and people, to
whom his tyranny and cruelty had become intolerable,
called to the throne the Polish Prince Vladivoj, a brother
of Boleslav the Brave, and son of the Bohemian Princess

^ Thietmar of Merseburg, quoted by Palacky.

An Historical Sketch 25

Dubravka. Boleslav III was obliged to fly from Bohemia,
and after wandering through Germany at last sought refuge
with his former enemy, Boleslav the Brave of Poland. In
the meantime Vladivoj, finding that the dynasty of Pfemysl,
whose claims in consequence of the crimes of Boleslav III
now reverted to his brothers Jaromir and Ulrich, had still
many adherents, endeavoured to strengthen his hold on
Bohemia by German aid.

He therefore appeared at the court of the German King
Henry II at Regensburg, and not only consented to the
payment of the tribute which had already been extorted
from several Bohemian princes, but also became a vassal of
the German monarch under the (German) title of duke.
Wladivoj only ruled Bohemia a few months, and died in
the year 1003. The Bohemians now recalled Jaromir and
his brother, and chose the former for their prince ; but his
reign also was only of a few months' duration. His brother,
Boleslav III, who had fled to Poland, now returned to
Bohemia, under the protection of the Polish Prince Boleslav
the Brave. Boleslav III had hardly reassumed the govern-
ment of the country when he attempted to revenge himself
on those who had formerly caused his downfall. By his
order many of the nobles were murdered at a banquet, and
the Bohemians again revolted against the tyrant.

Called in by the Bohemians themselves, Boleslav the
Brave again entered their country, and after having caused
his brother-in-law to be blinded and imprisoned in Poland,
he himself assumed the government of Bohemia. We are
told that he meditated making Prague the capital of his vast
dominions, and that he preferred Bohemia to his more
eastern possessions.

The great power of Boleslav the Brave soon became
obnoxious to the Germans, who always considered the
existence of a strong Slav power on their frontier as a
danger. The German King Henry II sent envoys to
Boleslav the Brave, requiring him to acknowledge himself a
vassal of the German Empire in respect of the newly-con-
quered Bohemia. Boleslav refused this proposal, and war
with Germany broke out (1004). The princes of the house
of Pfemysl, Jaromir and Ulrich, entered Bohemia as allies
of the Germans, and with the aid of sympathizers in thie
town succeeded in capturing Prague by surprise, and ex-
pelling the Poles from it, even before the Germans had
B2

26 Bohemia

arrived before the city. With German aid the Poles were
driven out of Bohemia, and Jaromir ascended the throne
with the sanction of the German king, probably — though
this is not positively mentioned — under the condition of
paying the former tribute. The Bohemians continued the
war against Poland as allies of the German king up to the
year 1013, when Henry II made peace with Boleslav the
Brave. By this treaty Boleslav was to retain all his con-
quests, with the exception of Bohemia, that country being
thus reduced to its narrowest limits, its natural frontier.

Even their great misfortunes did not induce the princes
of the house of Pfemysl to desist from their family quarrels.
About this time Ulrich revolted against Jaromir ; and both
brothers appealing to the German king, Henry II, foi
reasons which are not stated by the chroniclers, awarded
the crown to Ulrich. He also caused Jaromir, who had
sought refuge with him, to be delivered over to his brother,
by whose orders he was imprisoned in the castle of Lysa.

The only two remaining princes of the house of Pfemysl ^
having no descendants, it seemed at this period probable
that Libussa's prophecy would prove untrue ; but the old
chroniclers tell us that the extinction of the race of Pfemysl
was averted by a romantic incident. When Prince Ulrich
— whose wife was childless — was returning from a hunting
expedition to his castle of Postelberg, he rode through the
village of Peruc, and saw a young and beautiful maiden
who was washing linen at a fountain.^ Ulrich immediately
became violently enamoured with this maiden, whose name
was Bozena, and he married her.^ She became the mother
of the brave and handsome Bfetislav, the restorer of the
greatness of Bohemia.

The power of Poland, which country had for some time
taken the place of Bohemia as the most powerful West-Slav
State, did not outlast the life of Boleslav the Brave. After
his death (1025) dissensions broke out among his sons, and
both Hungary and Bohemia became involved in these
intestine dissensions. Ulrich sent an army under his brave
son Bfetislav into Moravia, which the Bohemians always

* Boleslav III had died in prison in Poland.

^ Bozena's fountain is still shown at Peruc.

^ The old chroniclers insist on this marriage to vindicate the legiti-
macy of Bfetislav, and there is no doubt that polygamy lingered in
Bohemia some time after the Christian faith had been accepted.

An Historical Sketch 27

considered a dependency of their crown, but which at that
time was also claimed by the Hungarian King Stephen.
Bfetislav succeeded in defeating the Hungarians ; and war
was ended in 1031 by a treaty which divided the ancient
Moravian lands. The country now known as Moravia re-
turned to Bohemia, whilst the other former Moravian lands
(now the Slav districts of Northern Hungary) fell to the
Hungarian king. The line of boundary then agreed upon
has remained the frontier between Moravia and Hungary
up to the present day. Ulrich appointed his son Bretislav
ruler of Moravia under his own supremacy, and this position
has since then often been held by the heir of the Bohemian
crown.

Unfortunately, Ulrich soon became jealous of his son and
drove him from Moravia. Bretislav, who had also incurred
his father's displeasure by taking the part of his uncle
Jaromir (whom Ulrich had released from the castle of Lysa
and who claimed to share the sovereignty with his brother),
fled to the court of the German Emperor Conrad. The
Germans, ever glad of an opportunity for interfering in the
affairs of Bohemia, supported the claims of Jaromir and
Bfetislav, and invaded the country, into which they were
sumfnoned by some claimants to the Bohemian throne.
Ulrich's death at this time (1037), however, secured the
crown to Bfetislav, in whose favour Jaromir also renounced
all claims.

Bfetislav I, whom Palacky calls the restorer of Bohemia,
strengthened his country both by conquests and by re-estab-
lishing internal order. One of the chief causes that defeated
Bfetislav's plans (and undoubtedly these plans aimed at
nothing less than the formation of a great West-slav empire)
was the accession about this time of Henry III of Franconia,
one of the most powerful sovereigns Germany ever
possessed.^ Poland, at the time of the accession of
Bfetislav I, was in a state of complete anarchy, and he
seized on this opportunity to attempt the conquest of that
country. Bfetislav successfully overran Silesia and sub-
sequently the western districts of Poland, where the town of
Cracow was taken by storm. The victorious Bohemian
army then marched further into Poland and captured

1 Palacky notices that the most enterprising princes of ancient
Bohemia, Boleslav I and Bfetislav I, were contemporaries and adver-
saries of Germany's two greatest emperors, Otho I and Henry III.

28 Bohemia

Gnesen, the former capital of the country. The body of
St. Adalbert, the former Bishop of Prague (who had suffered
martyrdom near Gnesen and was interred there), was
carried away to Prague by the victorious Bohemians (1039).

Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia, and Poland now being united
under one ruler, the idea of a West-Slav empire seemed on
the point of being realized ; but this time also Germany
stepped in to prevent the formation of a powerful Slav
State on her borders. Queen Richsa of Poland, who
governed that country for her infant son, appealed to the
German Emperor Henry III for aid, which was immediately
granted. In the folio wmg year (1040) two German armies
attacked Bohemia.

The one commanded by the Emperor himself attempted
to enter the country from Bavaria, but was signally defeated
in a great battle which was fought in the defiles of the
Sumava (Bohemian forest), the woody mountains that then,
as now, form the frontier between Bavaria and Bohemia.
In consequence of this defeat the other German army,
which had entered Bohemia by the Krusne Hory (Ore
Mountains), by order of the Emperor also retired into
Germany.

The Germans were, however, not long in seeking revenge,
and again attacked Bohemia in the following year (1041).
The western army, again commanded by the Emperor,
succeeded this time — guided by a German hermit — in
crossing the passes of the Sumava. The other German
army entered Bohemia through the Krusne Hory almost
without resistance, through the treachery of the leader of the
Moravian troops, to whom Bfetislav had entrusted the
defence of that part of the frontier. When the victorious
German armies had arrived before Prague, Bfetislav was
obliged to conclude peace on very unfavourable conditions.
He submitted to paying tribute to Germany, and was
obliged to give up all his conquests in Poland. Only
Moravia and a small part of Silesia remained with Bohemia.

The later years of Bfetislav I were peaceful, and from the
scanty records of his reign it appears that he exerted him-
self to restore order and prosperity to a country that had
suffered so much from civil and foreign wars. Bfetislav also
established a regular order of succession to the throne, to
obviate the constant strugQ,lcs among the members of the
reigning family (1054). With the consent of the nobles he

An Historical Sketch 29

decreed that the oldest member of the house of Premysl
was alone to be sovereign ruler of Bohemia, which was
always to remain undivided. The younger princes of the
reigning family were to receive lands in Moravia, which
they were to rule under the supremacy of the head of the
Pre my slide dynasty.

Bfetislav I died in 1055, and left five sons, the eldest of
whom, Spytihnev, who had been ruler of Moravia during
his father's lifetime, succeeded him. Spytihnev only reigned
six years, and was succeeded by his eldest brother Vratislav
(1061) j ^ whilst the government of Moravia was — under the
supremacy of Vratislav — divided between two of the
younger brothers, Conrad and Otho ; the former of whom
was to reside at Brunn, the latter at Olmiitz.

Bohemia having long been to a certain though limited
extent dependent on the powerful German Empire, it was
inevitable that the country should become involved in the
internal troubles which at that time broke out in Germany.
A great number of German princes had taken the part of
Gregory VII in that struggle with Henry IV — who had in
the meantime succeeded his father — which is known in
history as the " struggle for investitures." Vratislav sided
with the Emperor, and successfully availed himself of the
opportunity which the dissensions in Germany afforded for
the purpose of strengthening the independence and increas-
ing the power of Bohemia. The Bohemian troops took
part as allies of the German Emperor in the many battles
that he fought against the Saxons and other supporters of
the Pope ; and we are specially told that Henry IV's great
victory at Hohenburg on the Unstrutt (1075) was largely
due to his Bohemian allies. We also read that three hun-
dred Bohemian warriors formed part of the Emperor's army
which attacked Rome (1081), and that their leader, Wiprecht
of Groitsch, was one of the first to scale the walls of the
Leonine city. The chroniclers also tell us that the bravery
of the Bohemians v/as so great, that only nine of the three
hundred returned to their native land.

It was only natural that the German Emperor should
reward the Bohemian prince who had proved his friend
when the greater part of Germany had deserted him.
Henry awarded to Vratislav the lands of the Margrave of
Austria, who had sided with the Pope ; but though Vratislav
^ Has prince, I as king of Bohemia.

30 Bohemia

defeated the Austrians in the great battle of Mailberg (1082)
he did not succeed in permanently retaining their country.
In 1086 the Emperor, as a further reward, granted Prince
Vratislav the title of king, and presented him with a golden
crown. The coronation of Vratislav at Prague is an event
of great importance in Bohemian history, for the title of
king was then for the first time borne by a ruler of that
country. Henry, however, stipulated that the title of king
should only be used by Vratislav himself, and should not
be hereditary. It was settled, probably at the same time,
that in consequence of the sums lent by Vratislav to the
Emperor the former tribute should no longer be paid by
the Bohemian prince. They were, however, obliged to
send three hundred soldiers as auxiliaries to the German
kings on the occasion of their expeditions to Italy, which
were undertaken for the purpose of being crowned at Rome
by the Pope. Henceforth, down to the fifteenth century,
this remained the only real charge and obligation by which
Bohemia was permanently rendered dependent on the
supremacy of the German Empire.^

The dissensions among the reigning family, so frequent
in the history of Bohemia, did not cease under King
Vratislav. We read of conflicts between him and his
brothers, the rulers of Moravia, and a serious quarrel broke
out in 1092 between the king and his eldest son, Bfetislav.
Bfetislav, having been insulted by a courtier of his father
named Zderad, caused him to be murdered, and fled to the
Hungarian court, where he remained until his father died.
Vratislav was killed by a fall when out hunting (1092), and
was succeeded by his brother Conrad, as the family regula-
tions made by Bretislav I awarded the throne to the eldest
member of the house of Pfemysl, not to the eldest son of
the late reigning prince.

Conrad only lived eight months after his accession to
the throne, and Bretislav II now became prince of
Bohemia. We are told that he greatly exerted himself to
extirpate paganism, which still lingered in the outlying
districts of Bohemia ; and that he forbade the pilgrimages
which the heathen in Bohemia still undertook to the pagan
sanctuary of Arcona,^ their temples in Bohemia having
been destroyed.

As a proof that the custom of holding religious services
^ Palack/. 2 On the island of Rugen in the Baltic Sea.

An Historical Sketch 31

in the language of the country had not died out in Bohemia
at this period, it is of interest to read that Bretislav II
availed himself of dissensions among the Slavonic monks
of the monastery of St. Prokop on the Sazava, for the
purpose of driving them out of their convents and replacing
them by Latin monks (1096). Bretislav II is greatly
blamed by Bohemian historians for having changed the
order of succession established by his grandfather, Bretislav
I, by appointing his brother Bofivoj his successor, in oppo-
sition to the just claims of Ulrich, son of Conrad, then the
eldest prince of the dynasty of Pfemysl. Bretislav II was
murdered shortly after this (noo), probably by the emissary
of some nobles whom he had offended.

The wearisome dissensions in the reigning family of
Bohemia began afresh immediately after Bfetislav's death,
but a detailed account of them can be of little interest to
any but Bohemian readers. These dissensions were en-
couraged by the nobles of the land, who, at first mere
officials appointed by the princes,^ were now gradually
assuming a more independent attitude. The foundations
of the princely power, such as it had developed itself since
the final overthrow of the former hereditary voy vodes, were
undermined. The new nobles, aware of the advantages
which dissensions in the reigning family afforded them,
incited the Pfemyslides one against the other as much as
in them lay ; caused wars between them ; enriched them-
selves, and raised their own power to the prejudice of that
of the prince.2

Bofivoj, according to the decision of his brother, ascended
the throne, and at first successfully defended himself
against Ulrich, son of Conrad, who considered himself the
rightful heir to the throne. Bofivoj was, however, de-
throned shortly afterwards by another cousin, Svatopluk,
son of Otho, lord of Olmiitz. His short reign is only a
record of incessant struggles with the all-powerful nobles,
by one of whom he was assassinated (1109), after having
ruled Bohemia only two years.

After Svatopluk's death there were three parties in
Bohemia — one favouring the reinstatement of Bofivoj,
whilst another recognized Otho of Olmiitz, brother of
Svatopluk, as sovereign. A third party, which ultimately
proved successful, supported Bofivoj 's brother, Vladislav.
1 See Chapter II. 2 Tomek.

32 Bohemia

The rival competitors — as usual — appealed to the German
Emperor (then Henry V), who, though he appears to have
lured them all with promises, finally awarded the throne to
Vladislav. Civil war continued till Henry V, called in by
Vladislav, entered Bohemia. Bofivoj was made a prisoner,
and, by order of the German Emperor, imprisoned in a
castle on the Rhine; whilst Otho was confined by his
cousin in the castle of Piirglitz in Bohemia. Bofivoj's
adherents continued the civil war ; and Sobeslav, a brother
of Vladislav and Boleslav, became their leader. Sobeslav
obtained aid from the Polish King Boleslav, who, entering
Bohemia, defeated Vladislav in a battle which was fought
at the foot of the Krkonose or Giant mountains.

A compromise was then arrived at (mi), by which
at least temporary tranquillity was restored to Bohemia.
Vladislav remained sovereign, whilst certain districts, both
in Bohemia and in Moravia, were allotted to Bofivoj and
Sobeslav — and probably also to Otho — which they were to
rule under the supremacy of Vladislav.

Vladislav died in 1125, and a few days before his death
declared his brother Sobeslav his successor. As usual, the
discarded claimant to the throne, Otho, applied for German
aid, and the Emperor Lothair, who in this year (1125)
succeeded Henry V, also followed tl>e example of his
predecessors, and took up Otho's cause. Lothair seized
this opportunity for reaffirming certain claims of supremacy
which the German sovereigns had always maintained, but
which the Bohemians had always refused to recognize. He
declared that no prince had a right to ascend the Bohemian
throne before having received that country as a fief from
the rulers of Germany. Sobeslav refused to recognize these
claims, and in spite of the intestine divisions he seems to
have been supported by his countrymen. In a very short
time he collected a large army, v/ith which he defeated
(at Kulm, near Teplitz) the German troops of Lothair, that
had crossed the Giant Mountains. Lothair himself,
and the remnants of the German army, were entirely
surrounded by the Bohemians. An interview then took
place between Lothair and Sobeslav, when the latter
declared that though always ready to maintain the former
agreement between Henry IV and King Vratislav,^ he
could not consent to any further limitation to the indepen-
^ See page 30.

An Historical Sketch 33

dence of Bohemia. Lothair consented to these terms, and
from this time peace between Germany and Bohemia
remained undisturbed for some years.

As a proof of this we read that Conrad III, Lothair's
successor, conferred on Sobeslav the title of hereditary cup-
bearer of the Empire, thus granting him a certain influence
on the election of the German kings. " Bohemia, which
hitherto had only had certain obligations towards its power-
ful neighbour the German Empire, henceforth also enjoyed
certain rights with regard to Germany." ^

Sobeslav seems, on the whole, to have been successful in
suppressing the intestine dissensions which constantly broke
out afresh, particularly now that the members of the
Pfemysl dynasty 'had become very numerous. At a Diet
which assembled at Sadska in 1138, he obtained the consent
of the nobles to a change in the order of succession, by
which his eldest son Vladislav was declared heir to the
throne.

Sobeslav died two years afterwards (1140). On his
death the nobles, who had only consented to the succession
of his son from dread of the father, elected Vladislav 11,^
son of Vladislav I and nephew of Sobeslav, as their prince.

Vladislav II had probably been elected in the place of
his cousin beca.use the nobles hoped to find him more
amenable to their wishes ; but, relying on the German
alliance which he maintained, he soon attempted to rule as
an autocrat. An insurrection broke out only two years
after the beginning of his reign, and the malcontents, among
whom was Vladislav, son of Sobeslav, now proclaimed
another member of the Pfemysl dynasty, Conrad of Znoymo,^
as their prince.

Vladislav, though at first defeated by the insurgents,
finally — with the aid of the German Emperor Conrad —
succeeded in re-establishing his sovereign rights over the
whole of Bohemia and Moravia (1143).

We read that in the same year the Pope sent Cardinal
Guido as his legate to Bohemia, with the mission of re-
establishing order among the Bohemian clergy, which had
been greatly disturbed during the many civil wars. Cardinal

1 Tomek.

2 II as prince, I as king of Bohemia ; this Vladislav must not be
confounded with his cousin Vladislav, son of Sobeslav.

^ In German Znaym.

34 Bohemia

Guido was also instructed to affirm the regulations of the
Roman Church with regard to the celibacy of the clergy,
and he decreed that all married priests were either to
separate from their wives, or to renounce their dignities.^

During the reign of Vladislav II the second crusade took
place. The Bohemian prince took part in this crusade, the
leaders of which were his ally the Emperor Conrad III,
and King Louis VII, of France. Vladislav himself led the
Bohemian forces to the East ; but, discouraged by the
unfavourable results of the campaign, he left his army
in Asia, and, recommending his troops to the protection
of the French king, returned to his country by way of
Constantinople.^

After the death of the German Emperor Conrad III
(1152), the relations between his successor Frederick I
(Barbarossa) and Vladislav were at first somewhat
strained. The German sovereign favoured the claims of
several of the Pfemysl princes who had appealed to him ;
and he occupied Upper Lusatia, which Vladislav, after the
extinction of the line of local rulers, claimed as a fief of
the Bohemian crown.

A settlement was soon arrived at, as Frederick Barbarossa
at that time desired to collect a large army against Milan
and the confederate towns of Northern Italy. By a treaty
concluded in 11 56 the German king" ceded Upper Lusatia
to the Bohemian prince, and also conferred the title of king
on him and all his successors.

On the other hand, Vladislav promised to join the
German army in its march to Italy with a large force,
though the former treaties only obliged him to send three
hundred auxiliaries. Vladislav assembled an army of ten
thousand men ; and we are told that this campaign, more
than any previous one, spread the fame of the bravery of
the Bohemians through the most distant lands. The
Bohemian army took part in the siege of Milan, and

^ It may be noticed as a proof of how frequent marriage at that time
was among the Bohemian clergy, even of the highest rank, that we
find Jurata provost of Prague, Peter dean of the cathedral of Prague,
Hugo provost of Vysehrad, Thomas dean of the cathedral of Olmiitz,
mentioned among the married ecclesiastics.

^ Palacky tells us that while at Constantinople Vladislav concluded
a treaty with the Greek Emperor Emanuel, and that he was henceforth
by the Greeks considered as a vassal of their Emperor. Palacky gives
us no details as to these mysterious negotiations.

An Historical Sketch 35

Vladislav himself is said to have killed Dacio, one of
the leaders of the Milanese, on the occasion of a sortie.
After the capitulation of Milan, Vladislav II returned to his
country, and arrived at Prague towards the end of the year
1158.

Not long after this (1164) Vladislav became involved in
a war that had broken out in Hungary, between tw^o rival
claimants to that throne. In this war also Vladislav II
was victorious; and he succeeded in establishing Stephen
III, who had invoked his aid, on the throne, though the
rival claimant had obtained aid from the Greek Emperor.

In 1 173 Vladislav, tired out by his many wars, and per-
haps still more by the internal dissensions which still con-
tinued, abdicated in favour of his eldest son Frederick, and
retired to the monastery of Strahow near Prague.

The years following the abdication of Vladislav are
noticeable because of the uninterrupted struggle for supre-
macy between numerous members of the dynasty of Pf emysl,
in twenty-four years no less than ten changes occurring in
the person of the sovereign. As Palacky himself tells us
that the genealogy of the family of Premysl at this period
is very obscure, it could be of no interest to attempt to
decide the legitimacy of the claims of the various pretenders,
or to give a detailed account of the feuds which ensued.
It is of more interest to note that in consequence of these
civil wars, the authority of Germany over Bohemia became
far greater than before.

Frederick was, almost immediately after his accession,
driven from the throne by Sobeslav (II), one of his rivals
(11 74). Sobeslav maintained himself for some time with
the aid of Frederick Barbarossa, who recognized him as
Prince of Bohemia, though he decreed that the title of king
should no longer be borne by the rulers of that country.
The German Emperor, however, soon changed sides. En-
couraged by him, Frederick returned to Bohemia (1178),^
and waged war against Sobeslav up to the time of the latter's
death (1180). Frederick, unfortunately, soon found a new
rival in Conrad of Znoymo, also a prince of the Premysl
dynasty. Frederick was again obliged to fly from Bohemia ;
and the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa now summoned
Conrad and the Bohemian nobles who adhered to him, to
appear at the Imperial court at Regensburg, as he claimed
the right to settle the dissensions in Bohemia.

36

Bohemia

Conrad and the Bohemian nobles obeyed the Imperial
command, and thus tacitly admitted the claims of Frederick
Barbarossa. The Emperor awarded Bohemia to Frederick,
and Moravia to Conrad ; and we are told, as a proof of the
terrorism he exercised, that when the Bohemian prince and
nobles appeared before him to hear his decision, he caused
a large number of executioners' axes to be brought into the
hall where he received them.

This settlement was not of long duration. Besides the
two candidates already mentioned, the Pfemysl princes
Venceslas, Pfemysl Ottokar, a brother of Frederick,
Bfetislav, and Vladislav, all claimed the throne about this
time. Another prolonged struggle ensued, and it was only
after the deaths of Frederick, Conrad, and Bfetislav, and
the renunciations of Venceslas and Vladislav, that Pfemysl
Ottokar became undisputed ruler of Bohemia (1197); the
government of Moravia fell to Vladislav, with the title of
margrave, and under the supremacy of Pfemysl Ottokar.

The period in the history of Bohemia which ends with
the accession of Pfemysl Ottokar I is noticeable for two
important facts — the rise of the power of the nobility, and
the extension of German influence.

The constant struggle between the Pfemyslides had very
often obliged them to seek aid from the powerful nobles,
who from having been government officials had gradually
become territorial magnates, as they demanded and received
large grants of land from the princes whose cause they
favoured. These lands v,'ere usually granted as hereditary
gifts, and their owners therefore became less dependent on
the favour of the reigning prince, though they still desired
to hold the great State appointments, and, indeed, soon
began to consider themselves as having an exclusive claim
on them. It is an interesting proof of the increasing im-
portance of the nobility that some of the oldest noble
families of Bohemia — a few of whom are still represented —
are able to trace their origin up to this period ; surnames,
however, were not yet fixed.

The influence of Germany over Bohemia became greater
at this period, both with reference to the external relations to
that country and as regards the internal condition of Bohemia.
Legally, the only bond which denoted the dependency of
Bohemia on Germany was the obligation of sending three
hundred soldiers to take part in the Italian expeditions of

An Historical Sketch 37

the German kings ; but when, as at this period, Germany was
strong and Bohemia weak, and divided against herself, the
German kings claimed and exercised far greater rights ; they,
in fact, claimed the power of nominating the sovereigns of
Bohemia, or at least of confirming their election.

We have already read by what arguments Frederick
Barbarossa persuaded the Bohemian nobles to accept his
settlement of their differences ; and Henry VI is even said
to have promised the crown of Bohemia to Pfemysl Ottokar
on payment of 6000 marks of silver.

While Bohemia thus became more dependent on Germany,
the German element also acquired greater importance in the
country itself. As early as the end of the eleventh century
a small German settlement existed at Prague, which received
certain privileges from Sobeslav II ; the clergy was largely
of German nationality, and perhaps from dislike to the
cust.om of holding the religious services in the language of
the countr)^ — a custom that for a long time partially con-
tinued in Bohemia — favoured the German element in every
way. Another cause of the spread of the German language
and nationality at this period was the circumstance that all
the wives of the Bohemian princes, with the exception of
the peasant-princess Bozena, were of foreign, frequently
of German, nationality. These princesses often brought
German chaplains and other dependents in their suite, and
the Bohemian nobles also acquired the German language,
which became to a certain extent the language of the court ;
the German princesses naturally taught their children their
own language from earHest youth.

This feeling is strongly expressed by the contemporary
chronicler Dalimil,i ^y^-^q niakes the Bohemian prince
Ulrich say —

" Rather would I entrust myself to a Bohemian peasant
girl than that I should take a German queen for my v/ife.
Every heart clings to its own nation ; therefore would a
German woman less favour my language. A German
woman will have German servants ; German will she teach
my children."

^ See my History of Boheinian Literature, 2nd ed. pp. 29-35.

38

Bohemia

CHAPTER IV

THE BOHEMIAN KINGS FROM THE ACCESSION OF PREMYSL
OTTOKAR I TO THE DEATH OF JOHN OF LUXEMBURG
(1197-1346)

At the time when Premysl Ottokar I became undisputed
ruler of Bohemia, the internal condition of Germany was
favourable to the interests of the Bohemian princes, for
whom the only possible policy consisted in maintaining
their country's independence from Germany, as far as the
political situation enabled them to do so. At this period
Bohemia's connection with Germany, formerly so burden-
some, suddenly became the source of many advantages.
During the internal struggles in Germany the Bohemian
king, as the most powerful and the most independent of the
princes of the Empire, was able to obtain preponderance
for whichever of the claimants to the German crown he
favoured.

The German Emperor Henry IV died in the year of
Premysl Ottokar's accession to the throne (1197). The
Electors did not agree as to the choice of his successor;
while some wished to elect Philip, Duke of Swabia, guardian
of Henry VFs minor son, as king, others wished to exclude
the house of Hohenstaufen, and to raise Otho, Duke of
Brunswick, to the throne.

Ottokar at first sided with Philip, though not before he
had obtained some important concessions. Philip renounced
all claims to the nomination of the rulers of Bohemia, and
contented himself with a nominal right of confirmation.
He also renounced all claims to the appointment of the
bishops of Prague, and lastly conferred the hereditary title
of king on the Bohemian sovereigns for all time. Ottokar
was crowned king of Bohemia (1198) at Maintz at the same
time as Philip received the German crown. The Bohemian
king now became Philip's ally in the civil war that broke
out between him and Duke Otho, but the alliance did not
continue long.

Philip continued the struggle with the Pope, then Inno-
cent III, which had embittered the reigns of the former
emperors of the house of Hohenstaufen. The Pope, in
consequence, summoned the German princes to recognize
Philip's rival, Otho, as their sovereign. Ottokar was obedient

An Historical Sketch 39

to the wishes of the Pope ; and about the year 1203 we find
him fighting in Thuringia on Otho's side against the
adherents of Philip. Otho naturally rewarded him by
confirming his title as hereditary king ; and the Pope also
for the first time recognized the kingly title of the Pfemysl
princes, and guaranteed to them all the privileges they had
obtained from the German monarchs (1204). Ottokar
seems to have pursued a dynastic policy, striving to increase
the power of the house of Pfemysl, and alternating in his
allegiance between the rival German sovereigns. In 1206
we again find him an adherent of Philip, and it was only
after that prince's murder (1208) that he again recognized
Otho as king.

Otho, now undisputed ruler of Germany, soon became
involved in the same dissensions with the Pope as his former
rival ; and Innocent III therefore invited the German princes
to raise to the throne Henry VI's son, Frederick II, who
was afterwards to become so dangerous an enemy to the
Papacy. Ottokar was again subservient to the wishes of
Rome; and Otho attempted unsuccessfully, though aided
by an insurrection in Bohemia, to revenge himself on
Ottokar for his desertion. The Bohemian king became
an ally of Frederick II, who, besides confirming all former
privileges of the Bohemian princes, granted them permission
to liberate themselves, whenever they wished it, from the
obligation of sending three hundred men to escort the
German kings on their journey to Italy by the payment of
three hundred marks of silver. Frederick further decreed
that the attendance of the Bohemian monarchs at the
Imperial Diets should only be obligatory when these
assemblies were held in towns near the Bohemian frontier
— Bamberg, Niirnberg, and Merseburgh were specified as
being such towns. Ottokar was present at Frederick's
coronation (12 13), and the German king became undisputed
ruler after Otho's death (12 18).

About this time Pfemysl Ottokar, to prevent the renewal
of the troubles so often before caused by the uncertainty^
of the succession, persuaded the Bohemian nobles and
Vladislav, Margrave of Moravia, to recognize his son
Venceslas, then only eleven years of age, as heir to the
throne (1216).

The later years of the reign of Ottokar were troubled by
difficulties with the ecclesiastics, of which we have only

40 Bohemia

scanty and contradictory contemporary records. They
seem to have been a reflection of the greater struggle
between the German emperors and the popes, which is
known as the contest as to investitures. Andrew, bishop
of Prague (from the year 12 14), seems to have been a
priest of an austere but authoritative nature, who carried
the claims of the Church further than any of his pre-
decessors had done. He claimed absolute immunity from
the temporal law-courts, not only for all ecclesiastics, but
also for all their servants and dependents ; and, while
demanding perfect freedom from taxation for all Church
property, he attempted to enforce on the whole country the
payment of Church-tithes, to which only certain estates
had hitherto been liable. He further denied to laymen all
right of conferring ecclesiastical offices, though he himself
appears to have accepted investiture from King Ottokar.

These claims were energetically resisted by the king and
people of Bohemia ; and Andrew, fearing for his life, fled
to Rome, and there declared Bohemia to be under inter-
dict. It is curious to notice, as a proof of the independence
of the Bohemian clergy, that the interdict — according to
which all religious services were to be suspended — was not
generally observed, and that the canons of Prague and
most of the lower clergy continued to celebrate mass and
perform the religious functions as before.

Negotiations between the Pope and the king continued
for many years, and a temporary settlement was achieved ;
Bishop Andrew even returning to Prague (1222). The
quarrel, however, broke out afresh almost immediately ;
Bishop Andrew again fled to Rome, where he died soon
after (1224).

Pope Honorius himself succeeded, during the vacancy of
ihe See of Prague, in ending this struggle in a manner
favourable to the Church. By an agreement between him
and the king, it was decided that the Bishop of Prague
•should in future be elected by the canons of the cathedral.
The right of investiture, which had been exercised first by
the German and later by the Bohemian kings, was abolished.
This right, as in Germany, appears to have been the principal
cause of discord; the minor differences were also settled
favourably for the Church. Shortly before his death
Ottokar caused his son Venceslas, whom the nobles had
-already recognized as heir to the throne, to be crowned as

An Historical Sketch 41

king of Bohemia (1228). Pfemysl Ottokar I died in the
year 1230.

His successor, Venceslas I, ascended the throne without
any opposition, such as had almost always arisen on the
occasion of a change in the person of the sovereigns of
Bohemia. His reign is notable for the great increase of
German influence in his dominions. Pfemysl Ottokar I
had in the last years of his reign begun to favour the
immigration of German colonists to Bohemia, and this
immigration became far more extensive during the rule of
his son. Venceslas, to encourage the German settlers,
granted them a large amount of autonomy, allowing them
to administer law in their settlements, independently of the
Bohemian law-courts, according to the " law of Magdeburg,"
which had at that time been accepted by many towns of
Northern Germany. Such privileges were first granted
(about the year 1235) to the part of Prague where the
Germans had settled,^ then to the Moravian towns, Brno
(1243) and Iglau (1250), and later to a considerable
number of towns in Bohemia. The Germans — partly to
defend themselves against the enmity of the Bohemians,
partly to mark the limits of their privileged jurisdiction —
were allowed to enclose their settlements with walls. The
custom of fortifying the cities soon became general in
Bohemia.

Perhaps in emulation of the towns, the Bohemian nobles
also began to fortify their castles about this time. Follow-
ing the fashion of the court, they mostly gave their castles
German names, and these names soon became the surnames
of their owners ; indeed, it was only from the reign of
Venceslas I that hereditary family names came into use in
Bohemia.

There is but little record of the political events during
the earlier part of the reign of Venceslas ; but we read that
Bohemia, as was inevitable, soon became involved in the
great struggle between the German Emperor Frederick II
and the Popes Gregory IX and Innocent IV. The policy
of Venceslas during this contest, dictated as it was entirely
by the interests of Bohemia, was not consistent, and he
undoubtedly changed sides several times.

^ The present "old town." The three towns so often mentioned by
historians were the old town, new town, and the "small quarter"
(Mala Strana).

42 Bohemia

Almost at the beginning of his reign we find Venceslas
at war with Leopold, Duke of Austria (1231), and the King
of Bohemia was on the whole successful in this contest.
The Emperor Frederick, then his ally, decreed the ban of
the Empire against the Austrian duke (1236).

The friendly relations between the German Emperor and
the King of Bohemia did not continue long. Frederick's
power was at this time (1237) at its height; he had sup-
pressed all insurrectionary movements in Germany, he had
at last defeated the Lombards, and had also united the
kingdom of the Two Sicilies with the Empire. Though
the contemporary records are very obscure, it seems most
probable that Frederick now wished again to render
Bohemia as dependent of the Empire as it had at one time
been. The nominal cause of the quarrel was Frederick's
demand that Venceslas should restore to him certain castles
on the frontier of Bohemia and Saxony, which had for some
time been in the possession of the sovereigns of Bohemia.^
Venceslas now reconciled himself with the Pope Gregory
IX, and on his request became the ally of Duke Leopold
of Austria against the Emperor Frederick. Leopold
promised to add the part of the Austrian duchy north of
the Danube to the Bohemian kingdom ; but failing to keep
his promise the friendly relations only lasted a short time.
These contests between the German princes were suddenly
interrupted by a most unexpected event, the invasion of
Eastern and Northern Europe by the Mongols or Tartars,
as they were generally, though incorrectly, called.

The Tartars left their original homes in Asia, probably
North of China and not far from the region of Lake Baikal,
in the first years of the thirteenth century, and, conquering
all the countries through which they passed on their march,
reached the boundaries of Europe. They easily defeated
the disunited Russian princes ; and when it became known
that they had stormed and burnt the cities of Kief (1240)
and Cracow (1241), terror spread all through Europe.
Bohemia was directly menaced after the defeat of the
Polish and Silesian princes by the Tartars at Liegnitz
(1241). Venceslas seems to have behaved with courage
and prudence in this emergency. He hastily fortified the

^ The Bohemian frontier, in the direction of Saxony, then extended
further to the north-west than at present,' reaching as far as the fortress
of Konigstein.

An Historical Sketch 43

passes leading from Silesia into Bohemia. When the
Tartar army attempted to force these passes they were
bravely repulsed by the Bohemian soldiers. After three
weeks the Tartars abandoned all hopes of entering Bohemia,
and turned their attention to Moravia. They ravaged the
open country in Moravia, though they were unable to storm
any of the towns. ^ After devastating also Hungary and the
neighbouring districts of Lower Austria, the Tartars disap-
peared from Europe almost as suddenly as they had arrived
there.

As soon as the danger from the Tartars had passed over,
both the struggle between the Pope and the Emperor, and
the feud between Venceslas and Duke Frederick of Austria,
which was to a large extent influenced by the greater conflict,
began afresh. Venceslas at this period took the part of
the Pope, and became one of the supporters of William of
Holland, whom the Papal party in Germany had chosen as
king (1247).

In the following year a great insurrection broke out among
the Bohemian nobles, the causes of which are not certainly
known, though the great extravagance of the king appears
to have been the principal one. Venceslas's son, Pfemysl
Ottokar,^ who now governed Moravia under his father's
supremacy, became the leader of the insurgents, who chose
him as king.

The pretext for this insurrection was the king's command
to his nobles to take part in the crusade which Pope Inno-
cent IV had again decreed against the German Emperor
Frederick II. Civil war continued in Bohemia up to the
year 1250, when an agreement was arrived at. Pfemysl
Ottokar made submission to his father, who, on the other
hand, again entrusted the government of Moravia to his
son.

In the following year the Estates of Austria chose Ottokar
as their duke, and he made his entrance into Vienna shortly
afterwards. Though his deceased brother had been married

^ Many legends referring to the defence of the Moravian towns, and
particularly of Olomonc, afiervvards sprang up ; some of them are repro-
duced in the so-called MS. of Kralove Dvur.

2 Premysl Ottokar {II as king of Bohemia) was the second son of
Venceslas. His elder brother, Vladislas, who had been Margrave of
Moravia, and who, during one of the temporary truces between the two
countries, had married the daughter of Duke Frederick of Austria, died
in 1247.

44 Bohemia

to the daughter of the last duke of Austria,^ Ottokar had no
hereditary rights to the duchy. In order to strengthen his
position by an alliance with the former reigning dynasty, he
married Adela, sister of the late Duke Frederick, though she
was then forty-six and he only twenty-five years of age.

The duchy of Styria had long been connected with that
of Austria, and Ottokar therefore claimed it after his election
by the Austrian Estates. He thus became involved in war
with Bela, King of Hungary, who had long coveted Styria.
Whilst occupied with this war, Ottokar received news of the
death of his father, King Venceslas (1253). The necessity
of returning to Bohemia induced him to conclude peace
with Hungary (1254) ; and it was settled that v/hile certain
districts of Styria — since incorporated with Upper and
Lower Austria — were to be made over to Ottokar, the
greater part of the disputed lands, consisting of Styria in its
present limits, was to be ruled by King Bela's eldest son
Stephen, with the title of duke.

Pfem)'sl Ottokar H, who now became ruler of Bohemia,
was certainly one of the greatest sovereigns that country has
ever had. Though his reign ended disastrously, he un-
doubtedly for some time raised Bohemia to the rank of a
great European Power. The great reproach levelled against
him by Bohemian writers is that he unduly favoured the
German element ; and it is undeniable that he endeavoured
by all means to attract German colonists to Bohemia. The
towns of Bohemia and Moravia during his reign became
almost entirely German, and in consequence of the large
degree of autonomy that was granted them, governed them-
selves according to the old German town-laws.

One of the great motives of Ottakar's policy was, nf>
doubt, the intention of counterbalancing the excessive power
of Bohemian nobility by the formation of a middle class,
composed of the citizens of the towns ; but he may have
been influenced by other less obvious considerations. As
Duke of Upper and Lower Austria, and later of Styria and
Carinthia, Ottokar had become lord of vast German lands,
and indeed the most powerful prince of the German Empire,
over which he aspired to rule either with the title of king
or by his influence over an insignificant and nominal

^ Frederick II, Duke of Austria, commonly known as "der Streit-
bare" (the Warlike), died in 1246 ; he was the last Austrian duke of
the Babenberg line.

An Historical Sketch 45

king 1 It was therefore good policy for him to strive to
hide his Slav origin, and to appear as a German prince ruling
over a mainly German population.

At the beginning of his reign Pfemysl Ottokar II, aided
by several German princes, engaged in a campaign against
the heathen Prussians (1255), and after defeating them in
several battles succeeded m converting a large part of the
population to Christianity. The town of Konigsberg was
founded at this time, and called after the King of
Bohemia.

Probably in consequence of this successful campaign, the
German princes (1256) offered the sovereignty of their
country to Ottokar. The Bohemian king at this period
does not seem to have desired the German crown, but to
have favoured the choice of a weak and powerless prince,
who would be unable to interfere with his plans for the
aggrandizement of Bohemia. Ottokar, therefore, contributed
to the election of Richard of Cornwall, with whom he
remained on terms of friendship during the whole of his
nominal reign.

By the treaty concluded with Hungary in 1254, that
country had retained the supremacy over Styria ; but this
soon became very irksome to the Styrian nobles. In the
year 1259 they chose the occasion of a new dispute, that
had arisen between King Pfemysl Ottokar II and Bela,
King of Hungary, for revolting against the Hungarians ;
and Ottokar, arriving at Gratz in the same year, took
possession of Styria and appointed a Bohemian governor of
the country.

The Hungarians immediately decided to repel this
aggression, and during the following winter they raised an

^ Thoup:h the comparison may seeai far-fetched, there is some analogy
between I'iemysl Ottokar II's policy and that pursued by the Austrian
Government during the earlier part of the nineteenth century (1S15-
1866). Austria, holding the rii^ht of presidency over the German Diet
at Frankfort, was still nominally the greatest German Power ; and the
Austrian Government constantly endeavoured, by attempts of " Ger-
manizing " the non-German populations of the Empire, to justify the
predominance of that country in Germany. It may be remembered tliat
the Austrian ministers several times attempted to obtain the inclusion
of the whole Empire in the Germanic confederation. It is only a
natural reaction against this attempted " Germanization " that, since
the treaty of Prague (1S66) has dissolved all the bands that connected
Austria and Germany, the German influence and language have
constantly receded and still recede in Austria.

46

Bohemia

enormous army, which is said to have consisted of 140,000
men. Daniel Romanovic, King of Russia and Prince of
Kiew, the Prince of Cracow, and many of the tribes of
Eastern Europe, Servians, Bulgarians, and Wallachians,
joined the Hungarian standard.

In the meantime Ottokar had also assembled an army of
100,000 men, and — a mountainous country like Styria not
being adapted to the movements of enormous armies, which
largely consisted of cavalry — the plains on the frontier of
Hungary and the duchy of Austria, through which the river
March flows, became the seat of war. On the banks of this
river, near the village of Kressenbrunn, a great battle took
place (1260), in which the Hungarians were defeated with
great slaughter; we read that they lost 18,000 men in
battle, and that 14,000 more were driven into the river
March while flying from the field. King Bela now
renounced all rights on Styria; and Ottokar, to strengthen
his hold on that country, induced the German King Richard
of Cornwall to invest him with it as a fief. After their great
defeat at Kressenbrunn the Hungarians, though they were
in 1270 already again in arms against Ottokar, avoided
meeting the Bohemian army in the open field till they
obtained a powerful ally in Rudolph of Habsburg.

In 1268 King Pfemysl Ottokar concluded a treaty with
his nephew Duke Henry of Carinthia, by which that prince
recognized him as his heir in case of his dying without male
descendants. On Duke Henry's death in the following
year Ottokar was able to add Carinthia, with the dependent
lands of Carniola and Istria, part of Friulia, and the town
of Pordenone, to his already vast dominions ; several towns
of Northern Italy, Treviso, Feltre, Verona, and others, also
recognized him as their " over-lord "

Ottokar's power had now attained its summit (1269) ; but
dangers arising from the election of a German king already
began to menace it. Ottokar was probably not anxious to
obtain the German crown, which indeed he had declined
before, as long as that crown remained in the hands of
King Richard, who had no power of his own in Germany,
and was entirely in accord with the Bohemian king.

The death of Richard of Cornwall (1272) caused a
complete change in the prospects of Ottokar; his great
conquests had aroused the animosity of the German princes,
specially of Louis, Count Palatine of Bavaria; and the

An Historical Sketch 47

choice of the German electors was therefore likely to fall on
one of the Bohemian king's many enemies.

Pfemysl Ottokar II was thoroughly aware of this ani-
mosity, which his Slav nationality ^ probably rendered more
bitter, and, consequently, of the difficulties which stood in
the way of his obtaining, and far more of his retaining, the
German crown. It was only after a declared enemy had
been chosen by the German electors that Ottokar, when it
was already too late, attempted to obtain the German crown
by the aid of the Pope.

On September 29, 1273, Rudolph, Count of Habsburg,
was elected German king — unanimously, since the German
Electors declared Ottokar' s own right of voting as cup-
bearer of the Empire to be invalid. The German princes
at the same time signed a declaration, according to which
all fiefs granted since the death of Frederick II were to be
considered as void. This was aimed directly at Ottokar,
who had acquired Austria, Styria, and Carinthia since that
date. Ottokar disputed King Rudolph's election,^ and, as
mentioned above, appealed to the Pope; but it was from
the first moment certain that the fate of war only could
settle the difference.

At a Diet held at Regensburg in 1274, Pfemysl Ottokar
II's rights to all his newly-acquired lands were declared
invalid ; and his subjects in Austria, Styria, and Carinthia
were called on to rise against the Bohemian domination.
In 1275 the ban of the Empire was decreed against the
Bohemian king; and in the following year (1276) German
armies invaded his dominions in all directions, while the
Hungarians also chose this moment to seek revenge for
their former defeats. Styria and Carinthia were soon
conquered by the Germans, a large part of the nobility
having deserted the Bohemian cause. The principal
German army, commanded by Rudolph in person, entered

1 Pubitschka {Chronologische Geschichte von Bdhmen) tells us, quoting
from a contemporary chronicler, "Rex Bohemus Odoacrus (Ottokar)
nuntios et multam pecuniam et numera ad curiam domini Papae
Gregorii transmiserat eo quod ipse ad imperium aspiraret. Papa
munera non attendens circumsedentibus dicebat : Cum in AUemania
plures principes et Coraites habemus quare vellemus Sclavtun ad
imperium sublevare."

^ Space does not admit of my entering into the controversy as to the
election of Rudolph of Habsburg ; the details will be found in all
histories of Germany or Bohemia dealing with this period.

48

Bohemia

Austria by Passau, and, rapidly traversing Upper Austria,
soon arrived before Vienna.

Ottokar, who appears at first to have expected to be
attacked in Bohemia, now hurried to the aid of Vienna,
which town bravely resisted the invaders, and seems almost
alone to have remained faithful to the Bohemian king.
Unfortunately, while the king was in Austria an insurrection
against him broke out among the Bohemian nobility.
This last blow induced Ottokar to seek for peace and not to
risk a battle, the result of which was absolutely certain —
seeing that his army, in consequence of numerous defections,
consisted of only 20,000 men, while that of his enemies
numbered five times that amount.

The conditions of peace were very onerous ; Ottokar was
obliged to renounce all claims to Styria, Austria, Carinthia,
Carniola, Istria, and the towns of Eger and Portenau
(Pordenone). He only retained his hereditary lands,
Bohemia and jNIoravia, and recognized Rudolph as his
over-lord. A marriage was arranged between Ottokar's son,
Venceslas, and one of the daughters of King Rudolph.

On November 26, 1276, Ottokar appeared in the German
camp to do homage to the German king. In presence of
the German princes, most of whom were his bitter enemies,
the King of Bohemia bent his knee before Rudolph, who
was seated on the throne, swore fidelity to him, and was
invested with Bohemia and Moravia as fiefs of the Empire.^

It was almost impossible that this settlement should prove
definitive. It was difficult for Ottokar to reconcile himself
to the loss of the vast dominions of which he had been
deprived almost without having struck a blow ; on the other
hand, Rudolph, and still more Ottokar's enemies at
Rudolph's court, did not consider their victory complete
till they had completed the humiliation of the proud king
of Bohemia.

Dissensions broke out almost immediately. Rudolph
attempted to interfere in the internal government of
Bohemia to a far greater degree than any of his predecessors

^ The story, which has been often told — in a most amusing way by
Carlyle {History of Frederick the Great, Book II, chap, vii) — that
Premysl Ottokar requested to do homage tQ King Rudolph privately,
and that the ceremony took place in a tent, the sides of which were
suddenly drawn up, is entirely unhistorical. Aenaeas Sylvius {Historia
Bohemiae, chap, xxvii), who wrote two hundred years after these
events, is the first historian who mentions it.

An Historical Sketch 49

had done, and specially claimed a right of protection over
the Bohemian nobles, who, as mentioned before, had
rebelled against King Ottokar. The only choice that now
remained to the king was between renouncing his inherited
independent sovereignty over Bohemia, or again appealing
to the fortune of war. Ottokar chose the latter alternative.
In the year 1278 he entered Austria with a large army, and
advanced to the banks of the river March, near the scene
of his former victory at Kressenbrunn. Rudolph was not
unprepared, as, not thinking that the former settlement
would be final, he had remained in Austria. His army was
almost immediately joined by a large Hungarian contingent.
On the advance of the Austrians, Ottokar retreated as far
as Durrenkrut, and near this place a decisive battle took
place on the day of St. Rufus (August 26), a day destined
then, not for the last time, to be fatal to Bohemia's kings.
Ottokar was decisively defeated, principally through the
treachery of Milota of Dedic and other Bohemian nobles.
When the Bohemian king saw that the battle was lost he
plunged into the thickest ranks of the enemy, and died
fighting desperately.

The reign of Pfemysl Ottokar II, one of Bohemia's
greatest kings, ended with complete disaster; and it is
difficult to understand the complete and sudden downfall
of such a powerful empire. The fact that Ottokar had, by
the privileges he granted the towns, alienated many of the
powerful Bohemian nobles, who therefore deserted him in
the hour of peril, was undoubtedly one of the principal
causes of his downfall. Another still more potent con-
sideration was the question of nationality. Ottokar was,
justly or unjustly,^ accused of favouring the Germans to
the disadvantage of his own countrymen, and he had thus
become unpopular with the Bohemians. The stimulus
of national pride, which has sometimes animated the
Bohemians to most heroic deeds, did not therefore incite
them to rally round their king, whom many of them
considered nearly as much a German as his opponent.

Rarely has the death of one man had such melancholy
results for a whole empire. The Bohemian people, van-
quished by their enemy in a murderous struggle, were
suddenly deprived of the strong hand which for twenty

^ Palacky, whose national feeling is very strong, yet denies that
Premysl Ottokar II unduly favoured the Germans.

50 Bohemia

years had held the reins of the .State. It was inevitable
that the country should now become the scene of internal
anarchy as well as the prey of aliens.^

Rudolph's victorious army immediately marched into
Moravia, and the German king was favourably received
by a part of the inhabitants, specially by the population of
the Moravian towns, most of whom were Germans. In
Bohemia complete anarchy prevailed, and it was at first
uncertain who had the strongest right to the guardianship
of Ottakar's son Venceslas, then only seven years of age.
After some dispute the Bohemian nobles recognized
Ottokar's nephew, Otho of Brandenburg, as the guardian
of the young Prince Venceslas. Otho appeared in Bohemia
with a small force, and the country prepared to resist
Rudolph, whose army by this time entered Bohemia.

A treaty w^as, however, soon concluded (1278) by which
at least a temporary settlement was obtained. Otho was
to govern Bohemia as Venceslas's guardian for five years,
and Rudolph Moravia in the same capacity and for the
same period. It was also arranged that Venceslas should
marry Rudolph's daughter Gutta ; and the German king's
son Rudolph, Agnes, daughter of the deceased King
Ottokar.

Otho ot Brandenburg had hardly obtained the govern-
ment of Bohemia when he began shamefully to misuse the
power of guardianship that had been conferred on him.^
Aided by the German part of the population of Prague he
seized the heir to the throne, and imprisoned him in the
castle of Bosig. This treachery caused great indignation
among the Bohemian nobles, and a great number of them
entered into a confederacy for the purpose of rescuing their
future sovereign. Civil war broke out while Margrave Otho
had tem.porarily returned to his own country, carrying
Venceslas as a prisoner with him to Brandenburg. Otho
had left Bishop Everard of Brandenburg, a warlike and
unscrupulous prelate, at Prague, as his representative, and
the latter energetically defended the margrave's authority.

1 Palacky.

2 Recent German historians have endeavoured to defend Otho against
the unanimous condemnation of the contemporary chroniclers. Dr.
Novak has in an interesting article in the Cesky Casopis Historicky
(Bohemian historical year-book) proved that the traditional account is
correct.

An Historical Sketch 51

To resist the Bohemians Everard called in a large number
of German mercenaries, who, aided by the German settlers
in the country, pillaged and ravaged Bohemia in every
direction. It was said that the Germans thought the time
had come when the Slavs of Bohemia were to share the
fate of their countrymen in the formerly Slav lands of
Northern Germany. The result of this civil war was just
the reverse. The greater part of the Bohemian nobility,
indignant at what they considered the insolence of the
German townsmen, drew nearer to their own countrymen ;
and, out of hatred to the Germians, largely abandoned the
use of the German language, which had before this tim.e
been widely adopted, particularly at the court of the
Bohemian sovereigns.

The anarchic state of Bohemia brought about the inter-
ference of the German King Rudolph (1280); through his
mediation a truce was agreed to, and a Diet assembled at
Prague to restore order to the country. It was decided that
Otho of Brandenburg should retain the guardianship of
Prince Venceslas up to the end of the five years for which
it had originally been conferred on him. He was obliged
to promise in future to appoint a native only as his repre-
sentative whenever he should absent himself from Bohemia.
He further promised to withdraw his German mercenaries
from the country, and to order all Germans, not resident in
Bohemia, to leave the country within three days ; ^ other-
wise they were to be treated as thieves and murderers. Otho
lastly promised to allow Venceslas to return to Bohemia
on payment of 15,000 marks of silver; but though this
agreement was made in 1281, it was not until the year 1283
that the young prince returned to his country.

Though only twelve years of age Venceslas II nominally
assumed the government of Bohemia, as the office of
guardianship, after the late events, naturally inspired dis-
trust. The real ruler was one of the nobles, Zavis of
Falckenstein, with whom Ottokar's widow Kunhuta had
formed a connection ; on the birth of a son secrecy was no
longer possible, and a marriage between Zavis and Kunhuta
took place in 1280. Though she died not many years after
the marriage Zavis retained the high positions at court that
he had obtained through her influence, and became the

^ All the Bohemian historians agree in stating that only this ahiiost
incredibly short respite was granted.

52 Bohemia

principal councillor of the young king. His influence for
a time seems to have been unlimited ; and the towns of
Landskron and Policka, and the castle of Landsberg, are
mentioned as only a few of the many estates that Venceslas
granted to him.

Zavis was undoubtedly a great statesman. His poHcy
provided a Hnk between the reigns of Ottokar II and
Venceslas II. He constantly reminded the young king
of the greatness of Bohemia during the reign of Ottokar.^
He thus naturally incurred the displeasure of Rudolph, and
Habsburg intrigues were undoubtedly the cause of his fall.
To secure a foreign alliance Zavis obtained the consent of
King Ladislas of Hungar)^ to his marriage with the king's
sister Jutta, and after his marriage retired to one of his
castles. It is probable that he knew that the Habsburg
party at the Bohemian court had already influenced the
young king against him ; still Zavis, on the birth of a son,
requested Venceslas to be present as godfather at the
christening ; and the king, thinking he had now found an
opportunity of ridding himself of his over-powerful vassal,
accepted the invitation on condition that Zavis should first
come to Prague and escort his sovereign to the castle where
the baptism was to take place. On arriving at Prague,
Zavis was immediately confined in a dungeon ; he was
accused of having illegally appropriated lands belonging
to the Crown, and all his estates were confiscated. The
powerful relations of Zavis, supported by other Bohemian
nobles, took his part against the king, to whom they refused
to give up his castles, which they had occupied with armed
forces. Venceslas, k is said, on the advice of "the German
King Rudolph, resorted to a cruel device for the purpose
of subduing their resistance. He obliged his step-father to
accompany, as a prisoner, the force with which he besieged
the castles held by the rebels, and forced them to capitulate
by the menace of immediately putting Zavis to death. The
menace was successful in several cases ; but when the king's
forces arrived before the castle Hluboka,^ which was held
for Zavis by his brother Vitek, the latter, not believing the
king capable of the cruel act which he threatened to do,
refused to capitulate. Zavis was thereupon decapitated in a
meadow just outside of the castle walls in view of his brother.

1 Dr. Novik (in the Cesky Casopis Historicky).

2 In German Frauenberg.

An Historical Sketch 53

It is only from this date that Venceslas can really be
said to have reigned over Bohemia. After a short inter-
ruption he resumed the policy, hostile to the house of
Habsburg, which Zavis had adopted. It is probably for this
reason that the contemporary chroniclers — mostly Germans
— have done scant justice to Venceslas. Bohemia was
certainly very prosperous during his reign, and we read that
the silver mines of Kutna Hora, the great source of pros-
perity for Bohemia in the Middle Ages, were again worked
during the reign of Venceslas II. The richness and pros-
perity of the country at this period no doubt attracted
notice in the neighbouring countries, Hungary and Poland,
and inspired the people with the wish of also being under
the mild rule of King Venceslas.

During more than a hundred years Poland had been in a
state of complete anarchy, principally caused by the rival
claimants to the throne and by the incessant and ever-
varying partitions of the country, which were made to satisfy
the numerous pretenders. In the year 1291 Venceslas
was requested by a large party in Western Poland to
undertake the government of their country. The king
consented, and occupied these lands after very slight
resistance, assuming the title of Grand Duke of Cracow,
from the name of the principal city in the district. A few
years later (1300) King Venceslas, again at the request of the
Polish nobles, occupied the whole of that country, and was
crowned King of Poland at Gnesen. Bohemia and Poland
were thus again for a short time under one king.

In the following year, on the extinction of the old royal
family of Hungary, a large party in that country wished to
elect Venceslas II as king. They sent envoys to Bohemia,
and Venceslas declared to them that, being already King
of Bohemia and Poland, he feared the burden of another
crown, and advised them to elect his son Venceslas, then
only twelve years of age, as their king.

King Venceslas may also have thought that his son,
because of his youth, would be more likely to adapt him-
self to the customs of Hungary. The Hungarians followed
the king's advice, and the younger Venceslas was crowned
as King of Hungary at Stuhlweissenburg (1301), and for
some time resided at Ofen, the Hungarian capital. ^

^ The iirst wife of Venceslas, Gutta, daughter of King Rudolph, died
in 1298 ; he shortly afterwards — about the time of his coronation at
Gnesea — married a Polish princess.

54 Bohemia

King Rudolph, father-in-law of King Venceslas, had
died in 1291, and, contrary to the expectations of his
son Albert, Adolphus, Count of Nassau, had been chosen
as Rudolph's successor. Venceslas, between whom and his
brother-in-law Albert a personal enmity existed, favoured
the election of Adolphus of Nassau. Later on Albert's
sister, the Bohemian queen, appears to have exercised
her influence over her husband to such an extent, that
he at least did not oppose the deposition of Adolphus
and the election of Albert. The death of Adolphus of
Nassau at the battle of Gellenheim (1208) made Albert
undisputed ruler of Germany.

Friendship, however, proved impossible between the
kings of Germany and of Bohemia. Albert seems to
have been irritated by the power of the Bohemian king
in Poland and Hungary ; he therefore favoured the Papal
cause, when the ambitious Pope Boniface VIII contested
the rights of Venceslas over Poland and Hungary, declar-
ing that the right to confer the crowns of both these
countries rested with the Holy See. War broke out
between Albert and Venceslas (1304), and the German
king invaded Eastern Bohemia, hoping to possess him-
self of the silver mines of Kutna Hora ; but he was
forced to retreat before the Bohemian armies. In the
following year Venceslas II was preparing to invade
Austria, when he died suddenly at the age of thirty-four
(1305). Though the unfavourable political situation and
his early death prevented him from carrying out his
ambitious plans, it appears certain that Venceslas for a
time seriously contemplated the re-establishment of the
great Bohemian empire of his father.

His successor, Venceslas III, was then only sixteen
years of age ; and as he only reigned one year, it is
difificult to understand where the contemporary chroniclers
found the materials for their long— mostly unfavourable —
reports on his character and his actions. He undoubt-
edly concluded a somewhat disadvantageous treaty with
the German king, to whom he ceded lands (forming
part of the present kingdom of Saxony) to the north-
west of Bohemia that had belonged to his father. On
the other hand, Albert promised not to interfere in the
affairs of Poland and Hungary ; his claim to the latter
kingdom, however, Venceslas ceded to the Duke of Bavaria,

An Historical Sketch 55

perhaps despairing of maintaining his hold on the country
against the rival claimants.

Though Venceslas had given up his claim to the Hungarian
throne, he determined to maintain his hereditary rights upon
Poland.

An insurrection against the Bohemians having broken
out in that country, Venceslas marched to Poland to
suppress it. Before reaching Poland he was murdered at
Olomonc ^ by unknown assassins.^

The male line of the dynasty of Pfemysl, that had reigned
over Bohemia nearly six hundred years, thus came to an
end.

The sudden extinction of the house of Pfemysl left
Bohemia without any legitimate successor to the crown. Of
the royal family only Elizabeth, widow of Venceslas II,
Violet, widow of Venceslas III, and four daughters of the
former king remained. The eldest of these daughters,
Anne, was married to Henry, Duke of Carinthia, and popular
feeling greatly favoured the election of that prince to the
throne of Bohemia. Venceslas III had left him as his
representative in Bohemia when he started on his expedition
to Poland, and it was hoped that by this choice the Pfemysl
dynasty would be continued in the female line.

The German King Albert, however, declared Bohemia a
vacant fief of the Empire, and appointed as king his eldest
son Rudolph. The nobles assembled at Prague, and,
probably intimidated by the power of the German king,
elected Rudolph. They further, on the request of King
Albert, who accompanied his son to Bohemia, declared
Rudolph's brothers heirs to the throne in case of his death
without children. As a concession to the feeling in favour
of the old national dynasty, a marriage between Rudolph
and Elizabeth, widow of Venceslas II, was arranged.

1 In German Olmlitz.

2 Many historians have accused King Albert of being the instigator
of the murder of his nephew. The chronicler of the monastery of
Klosterneuburg, whose evidence, as being that of an Austrian, may b^
somewhat partial, writes —

" Wenceslas . . . propter insolentiam contra optimates suos in
Olomucz civitate Moraviae a suis occiditur . . . sicque contra vati-
cinium in gente ilia ab antiquo vulgatum Bohemiae regnum exhae-
redatur " {Per Scrip/ores Reritm Ati striae arum I. Chronicon Claustro-
Neoburgense). The last words refer to Libussa's prophecy (see Chapter
II).

56

Bohemia

Rudolph's great parsimony, which contrasted with the
splendour of the former Pfemysl dynasty, rendered him very
unpopular, and many of the nobles refused to do homage to
him. While besieging Horazdovic, the castle of one of the
opposing nobles, Rudolph suddenly fell ill and died (1307),
having reigned less than a year over Bohemia.

One of the first consequences of the extinction of the line
of Pfemysl had been the ending of Bohemia's domination
over Poland. The Bohemian governors of Cracow and
Gnesen left the country as soon as they ascertained that, in
consequence of the disturbed state of.Bohemia, they had no
hopes of obtaining aid from their country.

In consequence of the early death of Rudolph, the Bohe-
mian nobles had for the second time in one year to decide
on the succession to the throne of their country. Whilst
one party wished to maintain the hereditary rights of the
house of Habsburg, which had been recognized only a year
before, a largjer number of the nobles now desired to choose
Plenry of Carinthia as their sovereign, and declared the
claims of the house of Austria invalid.^

The Diet which had assembled at Prague in 1307 was a
very stormy one. The leader of the Austrian party, Tobias
of Bechyn, being called on by his opponents not to favour
the claims of foreigners and enemies to rule over his
countrymen, answered, *' If you wish at any price to obtain a
native prince, go to Stadic,^ among the peasants there you
will perhaps find a relation of the extinct royal family; bring
him here and seat him on the throne of your country."^
Infuriated by this insult against the old dynasty, Ulrich,
Lord of Lichtenburg, rushed across the council-room and
stabbed Bechyn to death. Several other nobles were also
murdered before the eyes of the widowed Queen Elizabeth,
who was present at the council. These stormy discussions
were ended by the election of Henry of Carinthia, who,
accompanied by his wife, arrived in Prague in the same
year (1307), where they were received with great enthusiasm
by the people.

^ The reason, or rather pretext, was that after Rudolph's election
Albert had formally appointed his son King of Bohemia ; thus throwing
doubt on the validity of his previous election by the nobles of the
country, and reaffirming the claim of the German kings to appoint the
sovereifyn of Bohemia, a claim that the Bohemians always contested.

2 See Chapter II. ^ Palacky.

An Historical Sketch 57

King Albert had, however, no intention of giving up
peacefully the right he had so recently obtained for his de-
scendants. He immediately invaded Moravia, and succeeded
for a short time in securing that country for Frederick, now
his eldest son. Albert then invaded Bohemia, but with
little success, though he succeeded in obtaining possession
of a few frontier towns, in which he left German garrisons
on retiring from the country.

Albert's assassination by John Parricida (1308) saved
Bohemia from great danger; for Albert's son Frederick,
who was menaced by an insurrection in Austria, and who
had not, as had his father, the support of the Empire,^ soon
came to terms with the Bohemian king. Frederick re-
nounced all claims to Bohemia and Moravia on condition
of receiving a large sum of money.

Henry's rule was now undisturbed by foreign enemies,
but quiet did not long prevail in Bohemia. Henry's popu-
larity had been founded more on his alliance with the old
and national dynasty of the Pfemyslides than on any
personal merits, and he soon proved himself incapable of
ruling the country in troublous times. Strife had arisen
between the German townsmen — among whom the citizens
of Prague and Kutna Hora appear to have obtained a pre-
dominant position — and the Bohemian nobility. The first
cause of the quarrel seems to have been the claim of the
German settlers to take part in the affairs of the country, in
particular to attend the Diet of the kingdom. The Germans
attempted to attain their purpose by forcibly seizing and
imprisoning several Bohemian nobles, who held the highest
offices of State. As a necessary consequence civil war
broke out, and Henry was unable to maintain order be-
tween the contending parties. The King on the whole
favoured the German townsmen; but his incapacity was
now generally acknowledged, not only by the Bohemian
nobility, but also by the majority of the clergy, and even
:he townsmen; and the necessity of choosing a new king
A^as agreed to by all parties. The choice fell (13 10) on
[ohn. Count of Luxemburg,^ only son of the new German
King Henry.

^ On the death of Albert, Henry, Count of Luxemburg, was elected
King of the Germans (1308).

2 "A celebrated place, too, or name, that 'Luxembourg' of theirs,
with its French marshals, grand Parisian edifices lending it new lustre;
C2

58

Bohemia

An embassy was sent to the German king requesting his
consent to their choice (John being then only fourteen years
of age), and also to the marriage of their new sovereign with
the Princess Elizabeth, second daughter of Venceslas II.
After some negotiations they obtained the consent of Henry,
who sent an army to Bohemia to accompany his son and
the Bohemian envoys on their journey.

John obtained possession of the country after a slight
resistance on the part of Henry of Carinthia, who, however,
soon left Bohemia. In the following year (13 n) John and
Elizabeth were crowned at Prague as king and queen of
Bohemia.

It was a great misfortune for the young king that his
father, Henry VII of Germany (who had, as was customary
with the German kings, undertaken an expedition to Rome
to be crowned there as Emperor), died suddenly on his way
back to Germany (131 1). Many of the faults King John
afterwards committed may be traced to the fact that from
his earliest youth he had been under no control. We read
that King John did not take his father's death much to
heart,^ and he attempted, though unsuccessfully, to secure
the succession to the German throne. His extreme youth
appears to have been the principal cause of his failure.

The German Electors having voted — some for Duke
Frederick of Austria, others for Louis, Duke of Bavaria —
one of the many contests for the crown took place which at
that period caused so great a decline in the power and
influence of Germany. In this struggle between the houses
of Habsburg and Wittelsbach King John sided with the
Bavarian prince, and his forces are said to have largely
contributed to the decisive victory of Miihldorf (1322).
We are also told that King John had the command of the
whole army, which on that day defeated the Austrian
duke.

King John's rule in Bohemia cannot, on the whole, be
considered as successful. His heroic death has made him
one of those kings whose names linger in the memory of the

what thinks the reader is the meaning of Luzzenburg, Luxembourg,
Luxemburg? Merely Llitzelburg wrongly pronounced, and that again
is nothing but Littlcborough ; such is the luck of names ! " (Carlyle's
History of Frederick the Great).

^ "Cito patris morte in oblivionem tradita" {Fez SaHptoi-es Kcruvi
Austriacarum I. Anonytni Leobiensis Chronicoji).

An Historical Sketch 59

Bohemian people ; but he was not popular during his life-
time. Though coming to Bohemia at so early an age, he
never appears to have shown any affection for the country,
nor indeed to have thoroughly mastered its language — a
matter on which then as now popularity in Bohemia perhaps
depends more than on anything else. The Bohemian
chroniclers complain that his short residences in Bohemia
were solely for the purpose of obtaining financial supplies,
and that having secured this object he then immediately
left the country in search of new adventures, His dominant
idea seems to have been that of chivalry. The English
King Edward III called him corona militiae. His nature
was that of a knight-errant or a Don Quixote ; if that typ^,
in many ways so touching, had not through being misunder-
stood long since acquired comic associations.^ It will be
sufficient to give a mere outline of the various warlike
expeditions of King John, which extended from Lithuania
and Hungary to Italy and France. As Palack^^ says : " It
would be necessary to write the history of all Europe if we
attempted to describe all the feuds into which King John
entered with chivalrous bravery, but also with frivolity. It
then became a proverb, that ' nothing can be done without
the help of God and of the King of Bohemia.' "

King John's reign was from its beginning disturbed by
internal dissensions, mainly caused by the enmity between
his wife. Queen Elizabeth, and EHzabeth, widow of Ven-
ceslas II and Rudolph I. One of the great Bohemian
nobles, Henry of Lipa, had obtained unlimited influence
over the widowed Queen Elizabeth, and he aspired to play
a part similar to that of Zavis of Falckenstein during the
reign of Venceslas II. King John having caused Henry of
Lipa to be imprisoned, a great insurrection of the Bohemian
nobility broke out shortly afterwards, while the king was
in Germany. Recalled by his consort, King John hastily
returned, and after much desultory fighting the differences
with the nobles were settled by a compromise under the
mediation of the German King Louis (131 8). Henry of
Lipa regained his liberty, and was reinstated in the offices
he had held at court. He seems, indeed, soon to have

1 We are told on good authority that King John intended to establish
the Round Table of King Arthur, and that he (1319) invited all the
most celebrated knights in Europe to a tournament at Prague ; nobociy
appears to have responded to the call.

6o Bohemia

become a friend and councillor of the inconstant king.
Probably through the influence of Henry of Lipa, whose
connection with the " Queen of Kralov^ Hradec " ^ made
him a deadly enemy of the reigning queen, John shortly
afterwards became estranged from his consort. It was no
doubt also Henry of Lipa who suggested to the King that
Queen Elizabeth intended to dethrone him and place their
eldest son, then called Venceslas, but afterwards known as
Charles, on the throne under her own guardianship. John
separated the queen from her eldest child, whom he im-
prisoned ; and as the citizens of Prague took the part of the
queen, " a war such as Bohemia had never known before,
a war between the king and the queen," now broke out.

Happily this contest did not last long ; a temporary re-
conciliation between King John and his queen took place,
and the young Prince Charles was restored to liberty. A
few years later (1323) King John, on the occasion of one
of his many visits to the French court, had his son, then
only seven years old, brought to Paris to be educated at
the court of Charles IV. On the occasion of his confirma-
tion the young Bohemian prince received the name of
Charles, after the French king.^

On the death of Waldemar, Margrave of Brandenburg,
King John became involved in the war which broke out
between the claimants to his succession. John claimed
Upper Lusatia as a fief of the Bohemian crown, and
succeeded in conquering part of that country, including
Bautzen, the capital of the district.

At tl>e beginning of the year 1327 King John returned to
Bohemia. Since the battle of Miihldorf (1322), which had
for a while put a stop to the war in Germany, he had spent
most of his time at Luxemburg or at the French court.
Restless as ever, he undertook an expedition to Poland
a few months later, wishing to re-establish the former
sovereignty of the Bohemian kings over that country.
Marching through Silesia on his way to Poland he forced
the small princes of that country to renew their former
allegiance to the Bohemian crown, which had been in

^ The widow of Venceslas II was known under that name, as she
generally lived at Kralove Hradec (in German Koniggratz), the usual
residence of the widows of the kings of Bohemia.

^ King John's sister Mary was married to the French King
Charles IV.

An Historical Sketch 6i

abeyance since the death of Venceslas II. King John,
however, abandoned his plan of reconquering Poland,
though his army had already arrived before Cracow, as he
received news that the King of Hungary intended joining
his forces to those of Poland should that country be
attacked.

Two years later (1329) we find King John again in the
north, this time on a so-called crusade against the heathen
Lithuanians. The Teutonic knights often required aid in
their struggle against the pagans in Northern Europe, and
the German princes frequently undertook warlike expedi-
tions to Lithuania and the neighbouring districts as a sub-
stitute for the former crusades to the Holy Land, which
many previous failures had rendered distasteful. After a
great deal of desultory and indecisive fighting King John
returned to Bohemia through Silesia, and succeeded in
obtaining by treaty that part of Upper Lusatia which, after
the death of Waldemar of Brandenburg, had remained in
the hands of one of the Silesian princes.

King John had spent the earlier part of the year 1329 in
Lithuania ; the latter part of the following year found the
errant king in Italy. Enmity between King John and his
predecessor on the Bohemian throne, Henry of Carinthia
and the Tyrol, had long ceased ; and John now wished to
arrange a marriage between his second son, John Henry,
and Margaret,! daughter of Duke Henry, and, as he had no
male descendants, heir to all his lands.

John visited Duke Henry (1330) at Innsbruck, where
the negotiations for the marriage were carried on, and here
received a deputation from the town of Brescia in Lombardy,
who requested his aid against Mastino della Scala, Lord
of Verona, who was then besieging their city. The ever-
adventurous king promised his protection, and the citizens
of Brescia recognized him as their over-lord. Mastino della
Scala, not wishing to encounter the powerful Bohemian
king, abandoned the siege of Brescia, and King John made
his triumphant entry into that town on the last day of the
year 1330. The Bohemian domination in Italy, destined
to be of very short duration, at first extended with almost

^ Known in German history as Margaretha Maultasche. ** Mouth-
poke, Pocket- mouth, Heiress of the Tyrol — with a terrible mouth to
her face and none of the gentlest hearts in her body " (Carlyle, History
of Frederick tlie Great).

62 Bohemia

incredible rapidity. Within the first three months of the
year 1331 the towns of Bergamo, Crema, Parma, Modena,
Novara, Vercelli, and many others, of their own free will
accepted King John as their over-lord. Even the powerful
Azzo de' Visconti, Lord of Milan, acknowledged the supre-
macy of the King of Bohemia. King John remained in
Italy till June (1331), when dangers nearer home obliged
him to recross the Alps ; he, however, left his son Charles
as his representative in Italy. Charles, though only seven-
teen years of age, for a time successfully defended himself
against the Italians, who had soon become tired of the
supremacy of the Bohemian princes. Mastino della Scala
of Verona, King Robert of Naples, the lords of Mantua and
P'errara, and Azzo de' Visconti of Milan, who had already
changed sides, concluded an alliance against Prince Charles.
Charles, who fixed his residence at Parma, one of the few
Italian towns that remained faithful to the Bohemian
princes, defeated the confederates in a very sanguinary
engagement that took place at San Felice, near Parma
(1332). This victory was not decisive, and Charles appealed
to his father for aid. King John recrossed the Alps, but
with very insufficient forces; the Bohemian dominion in
Italy collapsed as quickly as it had arisen, and both King
John and his son left the country before the end of the
year 1333.

King John's rapid departure from Italy in 1331 had been
caused by troubles north of the Alps, which were the con-
sequences of his Italian conquests. The German king
considered that King John had encroached on the rights of
the Empire by these conquests; John's old enemy King
Casimir of Poland, the dukes of Austria, Charles Robert,
King of Hungary, and his uncle Robert, King of Naples, all
joined him in opposing the ambitious King of Bohemia.
King John succeeded in pacifying the King of Germany by
the promise that all lands conquered by him in Italy should
become the joint property of the two sovereigns. He then
hurried to Poland, and by besieging his town of Posen
forced King Casimir to conclude a truce. King John then
proceeded to Paris with his usual rapidity, leaving Henry
the younger of Lipa to meet the attack of the Austrian
dukes, who, however, defeated him. King John's second
disappearance from Italy has already been mentioned.

" Whilst King John was thus wandering through distant

An Historical Sketch 63

lands the decline of Bohemia had, in consequence of the
king's irrational government, reached its lowest point." *
The king seems himself to have felt the impossibility of
governing alone a country from which, in consequence of
his adventurous life, he was almost always absent.

Shortly after leaving Italy King John proceeded to Lux-
emburg, where he had become involved in a feud with John,
Duke of Brabant ; but he left his son Charles at Prague, with
full power to govern Bohemia and Moravia. Always
jealous of his son, John had formally stipulated that
Charles should only bear the title of Margrave of
Moravia.

" Margrave Charles was unlike his father in many respects ;
he inherited neither his qualities nor his faults. John,
chivalrously brave and somewhat vain, was mostly guided
by his temperament, which, though vivacious and inconstant,
was generally intent on noble purposes. He loved warfare
above all things, both in good earnest and in sport ; he
sought out wars and tournaments ; cared more for glory than
for gain ; succeeded in conquering more than he was able
to retain. He attempted great deeds, but his want of thrift
often drove him to petty acts. His learned and serious son,
on the other hand, showed everywhere the most entire self-
possession, and in all matters of business acted according
to a fixed plan and with calculation ; he also fought bravely,
but he preferred to obtain his purpose by peaceful negotia-
tion. Orderly in financial matters, he showed exceptional
talent in the art of government, though his military capacities
were not great ; he obtained far more by the arts of diplomacy
than he ever could have done by the force of arms. John
hardly disguised the fact that he had little sympathy for the
land and people of Bohemia ; love for them seems, on the
other hand, to have been the one passion of Charles." ^

In a comparatively short time Charles seems to have
restored order in the disturbed country, and to have at least
partially improved its financial situation; though his task
was rendered more difficult by his father's constant demand
for money. About this time both Charles and his father
became connected by marriage with the royal family of
France, Charles marrying the French Princess Blanche of
Valois, and King John ^ the Princess Beatrice of Bourbon.

^ Tomek. 2 Palacky.

^ King John's first wife, Elizabeth, had died in 1330,

64

Bohemia

The result of these family connections was an alliance
between Bohemia and France, that lasted up to the end of
the reign of King John.

The death of Uuke Henry of Carinthia and the Tyrol
(1335) was followed by new strife in Germany, and the
ever-warlike King John now returned to Bohemia. The
German King Louis, John's former ally, joined the
Austrian dukes in an attempt to deprive King John's son,
John Henry, of the Tyrol and Carinthia, to which lands
he had become entitled as husband of Margaret " Mouth-
poke." To be secure in the north and east King John, on
the advice of his son Charles, came to a peaceful understand-
ing with the kings of Poland and Hungary. He renounced
all claims on the crown of Poland, but, on the other hand,
obtained the recognition of his rights over Silesia from the
two kings.

Unfortunately, an estrangement took place about this
time between John and his eldest son. Again fearing to
find a rival to the crown in Charles, whose popularity in
Bohemia was indeed far greater than his father's, King
John suddenly deprived him of all share in the government
of Bohemia and Moravia, and even of the revenues he
drew from these lands.

Charles acted with great nobility in the difficult position
in which he found himself. Contrary to what had so often
happened in similar cases, he declined to stir up civil strife
in a country which was already engaged in foreign war.
He left Bohemia for a time, and joined his brother John
Henry in the defence of the Tyrol, which Louis, King of
the Germans, had already attacked. John in the meantime
entered Austria with a Bohemian army, and succeeded in
separating the Austrian dukes from their ally, the King of
the Germans ; he concluded a treaty with them, by which
Carinthia was made over to the Austrian princes, while the
Tyrol fell to the share of John Henry (1336).

King John soon after (1336) undertook a second crusade
to Lithuania, during which he, through illness, lost the
sight of one eye — a loss that was soon followed by complete
blindness. We are told that the people did not pity him,
but said that his misfortune was God's punishment for the
hardness with which he — after superseding his son Charles
— had extorted money from the people of Bohemia. Charles
had accompanied his father on this Lithuanian campaign ;

An Historical Sketch 65

but he returned to the Tyrol directly afterwards, and it was
only somewhat later (1338) that a reconciliation took place.
King John now again made over the government of
Bohemia to Charles, and the latter was afterwards (1341),
with the full apiroval of his father, declared heir to the
throne by the nobles of Bohemia.

The same year saw the beginning of new troubles in
Germany. Margaret " Mouth-poke " of the Tyrol, inflamed
by a violent passion for King Louis's handsome son, Louis
of Brandenburg, and with an equally violent hatred for her
husband,^ drove the latter out of the country, and married
Margrave Louis. The distance of Bohemia from the Tyrol
rendered it difficult for Charles to come to the aid of his
brother; but both he and King John henceforth became
bitter enemies of King Louis, who had abetted his son in
his attempt to secure the Tyrol.

King John, therefore, probably by the advice of his son,
entered into negotiations with Pope Clement VI, who had
always opposed King Louis, and was now endeavouring to
induce the German Electors to choose another king. Charles
joined his father at Luxemburg (1344), and thence they
both repaired to the papal court at Avignon. There is no
doubt th?t the deposition of King Louis and the election of
a new king were then discussed, though the result of these
negotiations only became evident two years later.

In the meantime, the Pope's friendship had a very im-
portant result for the internal development of Bohemia.
On Charles's request the Pope raised the Bishop of Prague
— then Ernest of Pardubic — to the rank of archbishop, and
declared the new archbishopric independent of the German
archbishops of Maintz.^ It was also settled that the kings
of Bohemia should in future be crowned by the new Arch-
bishop of Prague. We are also told that through the Pope's
influence a more complete reconciliation between King
John and his son took place; and it is noticeable that
during the short space of life that still remained to the
king, we read of no further discord between the two.

^ The old chroniclers give amusing but not very edifying details
about this affair.

- It is curious to read that Charles was obliged to declare on his oath
that the language of Bohemia was a Slavonic one, entirely different
from the Gemian language; that the distance from Prague to Maintz
was of about tw elve day-journeys ; and that the road lay through other
dioceses.

66 Bohemia

On leaving Avignon, King John and his son first went to
Prague to be present at the installation of the new arch-
bishop. They then started for a new crusade against the
heathen Lithuanians, which they probably undertook at the
request of the Pope.

Whilst King John was occupied in the far north, the
German King Louis induced the kings of Hungary and
Poland, the dukes of Austria and several of the Silesian
princes, to join him in an alliance against Bohemia. With
almost incredible rapidity King John marched into Poland,
defeated the Poles and Hungarians, and besieged Cracow.^
King Casimir demanded a truce, which through the media-
tion of the Pope soon became a treaty of peace, in which
Casimir's allies, with the exception of the King of the
Germans, were included.

Against the latter the Bohemian princes, aided by the
Pope, now struck the heaviest blow possible. At the Pope's
bidding five German Electors, among whom was King John,
assembled at Rhense (1346), and elected King John's son.
Margrave Charles, as German king. This rendered further
war in Germany inevitable ; but the attention of the kings
of Bohemia and Germany was now attracted by events
further west.

War had for some time been carried on between King
Edward HI of England and Philip of Valois, King of
France, with whom John of Bohemia was on the same
terms of friendship as with his predecessor. On the day
following Charles's election as German king (July 12, 1346),
King Edward and his son the Black Prince landed on the
French coast, and marching rapidly through Normandy,
advanced nearly up to the gates of Paris.

King John with his usual impetuosity immediately decided
to come to the aid of the King of France. Apart from his
connection with the royal family, he had always felt strong
sympathy for France, and specially for Paris ; he was even
reported to have said that he cared to live there only, as it
was the most chivalrous city in the world.

Not stopping to assemble an army — though he would

^ During the siege of Cracow, King Casimir of Poland is said to have
provoked the King of Bohemia to single combat, as a means of ending
the war. King John answered that he was quite willing to accept the
challenge on condition of Casimir's consenting to have both his eyes put
out, thus rendering their chances equal.

An Historical Sketch 67

probably have rendered the French far greater service had
he done so — he left Luxemburg (where he had gone im-
mediately after the election of Rhense) for Paris, accom-
panied by his son Charles and only five hundred horsemen,
mostly Bohemian nobles and knights. When they arrived
in Paris, the enemy's camp-fires and the reflection of many
burning villages in the sky could be seen from the towers of
Notre-Dame.

King Edward marched northward shortly afterwards to
join the Flemish forces that were gathering at Gravelines,^
and the Bohemians, joining the French army, took part in
King Philip's march into Picardy. When the English army
essayed the passage of the Somme at the bridge of St. Remy,
near Abbeville, it was principally the Bohemian troops who
prevented the attempt^ As is knovm to all readers of English
history, King Edward's army crossed the Somme shortly
afterwards by surprising the ford of Blanche-Taque.

The English army reached the village of Crecy on August
25, but the French and their allies only arrived there on the
following day. Henry Monch of Basel, a knight serving
under the King of Bohemia, was sent forward with one or
two followers to reconnoitre the position of the English
army, which the French still believed to be in full retreat.
He reported that this was entirely untrue, and that the
English army was, on the contrary, preparing for battle.
Henry Monch of Basel, and with him his warlike king,
therefore strongly advised that the attack should be deferred
to the following day, as the troops were fatigued by a long
march. As is known, this advice was over-ruled, and the
battle immediately began. The Bohemians remembered
that it was the day of St. Rufus (August 26), the anniversary
of the defeat and death of Pfemysl Ottokar II.

1 The old Bohemian chronicler Dubravius, with uncritical but rather
touching patriotism, accounts for the change of King Edward's plans
by ihe arrival of the horsemen of the King of Bohemia : " Edoardus
Angliae rex cogniio Boiemororum et Germanorum adventu ab absiciione
Lutaetiae Parisiorum discedit" (Dubravius, Historia Bohemiae, lib. xxi).
Besides the Bohemians, a few German knights from Luxemburg were
under King John's command.

'^ " Vicesima secunda die Augusti fuit rex Angliae ad Pontem Remi
in Ponteu versus Abbeville et volebant transire Anglici per pontem sed
gentes regis Boemiae et ejus filii et D. Johannes de Bryaumont restite-
ruiit et ibi conflictus magnus unde ex utraque parte plures ceciderunt "
( Palacky, quoting from a contemporary manuscript of Limuisis, abbot
of St. Martin at Tournay).

68 Bohemia

The kings of Bohemia and Germany, with their small
band, remamed with the rear of the army at the beginning
of the battle, not probably very confident in the result of an
engagement which had been brought on against their advice.
When the defeat of the French seemed certain, some of the
Bohemian nobles informed King John of the unfavourable
turn the battle was taking, and advised him to follow the
example of the French, who were already retreating. King
John then spoke the memorable words : " So will it God,
it shall not be that a king of Bohemia flies from the battle-
field." 1

King John then ordered two of his bravest knights,
Henry Monch of Basel and Henry of Klingenberg, to attach
their bDrses to his, and to guide him to where the Black
Prince stood. He then gave the watchword " Praha "
(Prague), and the knights and nobles, following close behind
their king, charged in the direction of the English army.
Passing rapidly through the flying Frenchmen they pene-
trated, wedged close together, into the thickest of the
English ranks, and had for a moment nearly reached the
spot where the Black Prince stood. Soon beaten back by
overwhelming numbers. King John fell from his horse
mortally wounded, and fifty of the chief nobles soon lay
dead round their king. Hardly any of the Bohemians
survived, and the flower of the Bohemian nobility perished
on the battle-field of Cr^cy.

The charge of the blind King of Bohemia, useless and
even faulty, from a military point of view, as the charge of
the Light Brigade at Balaclava, is equally immortal : even
after more than five hundred years a Bohemian cannot
write of this "gallant deed of arms" without feeling his
blood stirred.

Late in the evening King John was found, still alive, on
the battle-field, and King Edward caused him to be
carried to his own tent, where he died in the course of the
night.

On hearing of his death. King Edward, we are told, was
unable to refrain from tears, and he exclaimed : " The

^ Palacky says that these last words of their blind king remained for
ever in the memory of the Bohemians, and that they became a proverb
in the country. Palack^ also notes that no king of Bohemia ever fled
from the battle-field, and that neither Premysl Ottokar II nor Louis I
survived their defeat.

An Historical Sketch 69

crown of chivalry has fallen to-day; never was any one
equal to this King of Bohemia." ^ King Edward and the
Biack Prince were present when the last religious rites were
performed over the dead king of Bohemia, and they caused
his corpse to be delivered for burial to his son Charles.
King Charles had himself fought heroically by the side of
his father; and after he had been severely wounded, the
few remaining Bohemian knights, " fearful of losing both
their kings," ^ forced him to leave the battle-field.

CHAPTER V

FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE REIGN OF CHARLES IV TO
THE CORO>fATION OF KING SIGISMUND (1346-I420)

The accession of Charles IV to the throne of Bohemia
marks the beginning of a new period in the history of the
country. His reign differed as widely from that of his father
as did the personal character of the two princes. Whereas
King John was vacillating and uncertain in his policy, his
son Charles appears to have set before him clearly the nature
of the problems with which he was to deal. While John was
frequently absent from his country, Charles was ever ready
and anxious to pursue its true interests. In the reign of
the father Bohemia's influence in European affairs remained
stationary, if it did not actually decline. But Charles not only
raised it to a position it had never before attained, but sought
out every means of improving its internal condition. It is
true that the general political condition of Europe was more
favourable to Charles's policy than it had been to his father's.
The German princes had never allow^ed Bohemia fair play ;
this impediment to the progress of Bohemia ceased now
that Charles, King of Bohemia, himself became German
Emperor.

Professor Freeman has given it as his opinion that while
Charles made a good King of Bohemia, he " sadly lowered "
the empire both in Germany and in Italy. It would not
be easy to prove in what way Charles " sadly lowered " the
empire. It is at any rate certain that he was one of the best
kings and truest patriots of Bohemia.

As mentioned in the last chapter, Charles left the battle-
field of Cr^cy accompanied only by a few knights. He at
* Benes de Weitmil. * Benes de Weitmil.

70 Bohemia

first retired to the monastery of Ourschamp near Nyon to
nurse the wounds he had received. Charles then returned
to Bohemia, and was preparing an invasion of Bavaria when
the sudden death of King Louis (1347) freed him from his
most dangerous enemy.

The party in Germany opposed to Charles did not, how-
ever, despair of raising up another rival king. Although
King Edward III of England had already recognized the
right of King Charles to the German throne, it was on him
that the choice of the enemies of Charles first fell, as his
victory at Crecy had made his name prominent throughout
Europe.

King Charles sent William, Margrave of Juliers (Jiilich),
as envoy to the King of England, with the mission of
dissuading him from accepting the German crown. This
mission proved successful, and Edward (1348) refused the
crown that was offered to him, and even concluded a treaty
of alliance with King Charles.

Unable to find any prince who was willing to oppose
Charles as King of the Germans, his enemies now chose
Count Giinther of Schwarzburg as king, a noble who was
almost without territorial possessions, but who had enriched
himself as a soldier of fortune. Count Giinther's death in
the following year (1343) for a time put an end to civil war
in Germany, and we are told that King Charles, as a proof
that he bore him no malice, was himself present at the
funeral of the Count of Schwarzburg. The troubles caused
about this time by the appearance of the " False Valdemar "
in Bradenburg, and the part King Charles took in them,
belong to German rather than to Bohemian history, and it
will be of more interest to notice the various measures by
which Charles strove to improve the social and political
condition of Bohemia.

During the past reigns, particularly that of King John,
the great nobles had profited by the constant financial
difficulties of their sovereigns for the purpose of acquiring
almost all the Crown lands which they held as securities for
various — mostly very small— loans which they had made to
their kings. Charles had already, as regent during his
father's lifetime, succeeded in redeeming a great number of
the pledged lands and castles, and during his reign he
entirely carried out his design of liberating the Bohemian
crown from a position of humiliating dependency. One of

i

An Historical Sketch 71

the first measures of Charles consisted in the re-establish-
ment of a regular administration of the law. During the
reign of King John the former law-courts had, in consequence
of the anarchical state of the country, almost entirely ceased
to exist. Charles now divided the whole country into
thirteen districts for the administration of justice, and he
established a court of justice in the central town of each of
these districts.

He also created, or perhaps re-established, a High Court
of Law at Prague. In all these courts of law the Bohemian
language was to be exclusively used. What has more than
anything else endeared the memory of Charles to the
Bohemian people is the favour he always showed to the
national language, to which the Bohemians have at all
times been devotedly attached. During the period from
the reign of Pfemysl Ottokar I to that of King John (1192-
1346), the Bohemian language was several times near
sharing the fate of the Slav dialects of Northern Germany.
The greater development of the Bohemian language, which
at that time already possessed a literature of its own, and
the influence of the Bohemian nobles, who from hostility to
the German settlers soon again began to use their native
tongue, preserved it from that fate. It was by the influence
of Charles alone that Bohemian again became the language
of the court, and he himself — though he used the Latin
language for his writings^ — soon spoke the language of
his country fluently. It is said that on his first return
from France (where he was educated), his earliest thought
was to acquire a thorough knowledge of the Bohemian
tongue. One of the consequences of Charles's predilec-
tion for the Bohemian language was that, though main-
taining the privileges conferred by his predecessors on
the German colonists, he yet secured equality for the
Bohemian language in the towns that were mainly inhabited
by Germans. Charles decreed that at the assemblies of the
town magistrates the speakers should, according to their
own choice, use either the Bohemian or the German
language, that no one speaking German only should be

^ The very interesting Latin autobiography of Charles IV, Commen-
tarius de Vita Caroli Bohemiae Regis ab ipso Carolo conscriptus, has
been preserved, and is printed in Frehertis Reruni Bohemiarum Antiqni
Scriptores. It unfortunately relates only to a small part of the patriot
kincr's life.

72 Bohemia

appointed as judge, and that all German parents should be
called on to have their children taught the Bohemian
language.

It seems that Charles not only favoured the national
language, but that he, with the political insight which was
his characteristic, also realized the connection of the
language and people of Bohemia with the other Slav races,
an idea which is generally known under the foolish and
incorrect denomination of Panslavism, and is usually
supposed to be of modern origin. Charles showed his
knowledge of the connection of the Slav races by the
foundation of a Benedictine monastery in Prague, which
was to revive the traditions of the former monastery of St.
Prokop on the Sazava.^ For the monks of this convent
Charles obtained the Pope's permission to use the Slavonic
tongue for all ecclesiastical functions, and to make use of
the Cyrillic alphabet.^ This scheme seems, next to the
foundation of the University of Prague, to have been one of
King Charles's favourite plans, and in spite of the many
difficulties at the beginning of his reign he was able, in the
year 1347, to assemble numerous monks from Croatia,
Dalmatia, and Bosnia in the new monastery.

The great interest which Charles — who was less inclined
than any man to pursue merely imaginative aims — showed
for this foundation has attracted the attention of Bohemian
historians. Palack^^ believes that the plan of uniting the
Eastern with the Western Church, which then, as at so
many other periods of history, was being discussed, may
have been one of King Charles's m.otives, apart from his

1 See Chapter III. 1

2 The foundation of this convent is of some importance with regard
to the controversy as to the origin of the Hussite movement. The
almost general opinion of Russian authorities is in favour of considering
that movement as one caused by the desire of the Bohemians to return
to the Eastern Church, from which their country had first received the
Christian faith. In his letter to Pope Clement VI, in which he requests
the Pope's consent to the establishment of the Slavonic ritual in the
new monastery, Charles says that "there are many dissidents and
unbelieving people who, when the gospel is explained and preached
to them in Latin, will not understand, and that they might (thus)
perhaps be directed to the Chris' ian faith" (Professor Kalousek, in
the Casopis Musea Ceskeho (Journal of the Bohemian Museum) for
1882). Professor Kalousek thinks that these words — though their
meaning seems very clear — contain a " pia fraus" on the part of
King Charles.

An Historical Sketch 73

wish to obtain an alliance with the then powerful Servian
princes against the ever-menacing Turkish Empire.^

In 134S Charles assembled the Estates of Bohemia at
Prague, and in his capacity as King of the Germans
confirmed all the privileges which former kings had con-
ferred on the country, but which, specially since the end
of the reign of Pfemysl Ottokar II, had been in abeyance.
The right of the Estates to choose their king was again
sffirmed, but with the qualification that it should only come
into force in the case of the extinction of the royal family,
which meanwhile was to succeed to the throne according
to the rule of primogeniture. By further enactment Charles
defined the position of Moravia — then governed by the
king's brother, John Henry — with reference to Bohemia,
and also decreed that Silesia and Upper Lusatia should
henceforth form parts of the lands of the Bohemian crown.

At this Diet King Charles also announced his intention
of founding a university at Prague. It is characteristic of
his interest in this, his favourite creation, that he had,
shortly after the battle of Crecy — even before his return
to Bohemia — written to the Pope asking his consent to the
foundation of the new university, a consent that was readily
granted. A not very well authenticated report tells us that
Charles had as a youth studied at the University of Paris,
but it is more probable that during his first stay in Italy
he had acquired a love of learning, at that time very un-
usual among the princes and nobles of Northern Europe.
The king himself superintended the organization of the
university, which was destined soon to acquire a world-
wide reputation as the centre of the Hussite movement.
In his invitation to the scholars of all countries to fre-
quent the new university, Charles assured to them all the
privileges and the immunities which the students of Paris
and Bologna enjoyed. Charles appointed the Archbishop
of Prague, Ernest of Pardubic, as first chancellor of his
new university, and divided it (according to the system still
prevalent in Germany) into four "faculties," the theological,

^ Palacky quotes a letter which Charles wrote to Stephan Dusan,
then ruler of Servia, in wiiich he alludes to their common nationality;
"DeVobis . . . quern Nobis regiae dignitatis honor fraternal! dilectione
parificat et ejusdem nobilis Slavici idiomatis participatio facit esse com-
munem cum ejusdem generosae linguae sublimitas nos felicibus, auctore
domino, et gratis auspiciis parturiverit."

74 Bohemia

the juridical, the medical, and the philosophical one. The
university was also divided — according to the nationality
of the students — into "nations," of which the Bohemian
" nation" also included the students from Moravia, Hungary,
and the southern Slav lands. The Bavarian " nation,"
besides the inhabitants of that country, also comprised the
Austrians, Swabians, Franconians, and inhabitants of the
Rhine-lands, whilst the PoHsh "nation" was composed —
besides the Poles — of Silesians, Russians, and Lithuanians.
The fourth, the Saxon "nation," contained, besides the
Saxon students, also those from Meissen and Thuringia, as
well as those from Denmark and Sweden.

It was undoubtedly in connection with this foundation ^
that King Charles decided on enlarging the town of Prague
by building the "new town" (Nove Mesto) between the
Vysehrad hill and the banks of the Vltava.^

Among the many efforts of King Charles to increase the
prosperity of Bohemia, we must not omit the protection he
afiorded to the commerce of the country. " Every one of
the treaties of peace and conventions he m.ade, as a rule,
contained stipulations in favour of the Bohemian mer-
chants." ^ Some of the dispositions he made appear strange
from the point of view of modern national economy, but
were no doubt adapted to the times. Among other similar
regulations, Charles decreed that all foreign merchants who
crossed the Bohemian frontier should be compelled to come
to Prague, and there for a time exhibit their goods for sale.
Foreign merchants were further forbidden to transact any
business, especially banking business, among themselves,
but were only to do so through the medium of a Bohemian
merchant.

Two institutions created by King Charles, which still bear
his name, date from about this time. In the year 1348
Charles began to build a large fortified castle in a very
strong, indeed at that time impregnable, situation on the
summit of a steep rock to the west of, and not far from, the
city of Prague. This castle, to which Charles gave the
name of Karlstein, was intended to be a safe depository
for the Crown jewels and treasures of the Bohemian kings,
as well as the State archives of the country. It could also

1 The number of students during the lifetime of King Charles already
amounted to between five and seven thousand.

2 In German Moldan. ^ Palacky.

An Historical Sketch 75

serve as a stronghold to which the members of the royal
family could retire in time of danger. Charles appointed
two burgraves, one chosen from among the nobles and the
other from the knights, as governors of the Karlstein, and
these burgraves — who were considered not only as Court
but also as State officials — afterwards ranked among the
most important dignities of Bohemia.

Another very different foundation has also retained the
name of Charles ; it is the now well-known w^atering-place
of Karlsbad. The legend tells us that when the king was
pursuing a stag he was surprised to hear one of his hounds
suddenly howl, and that he then noticed that the animal
had been badly scalded while crossing a stream. He is
said to have caused the water of this stream to be medically
examined, and its salutary effects thus became known. It
seems probable that the existence of these hot springs was
locally known before the time of King Charles, but it was
undoubtedly due to him that their fame spread. Charles
built himself a castle near these springs which he called
Karlsbad, a name that soon extended to the few dwellings
then standing near the spot.

While endeavouring to secure order and prosperity to
Bohemia, Charles also successfully essayed to extend the
frontiers of the country. German authors have indeed, not
without truth, often accused him of preferring Bohemia to
their own land. Early in his reign the king acquired by
purchase twenty towns and castles in the Upper Palatine,
thus — for the time — extending the Bohemian frontier
nearly to the gates of Nuremberg. Towards the end of
the year 1354 Charles undertook the expedition to Rome
which had become almost obligatory for the German kings.
He first proceeded to Milan, where he was crowned with
the iron crown of the Lombard kings, and then continued
his journey to Rome, where his coronation as Emperor
took place, two cardinals sent from Avignon by Innocent
VI acting as the Pope's substitutes. On his return north
the new Emperor, while at Pisa, was attacked by one of the
factions then disputing for the domination of the town,^ and
only saved by the bravery of his body-guard. After having

^ Benes de Weitmil {Chronicon, lib. iv) calls them "fraude diabolica
pleni et in omni malitia experti." Weitmil's account of the events at
Pisa agrees with the Italian account contained in the chronicle of the
Villani.

76

Bohemia

defeated and punished the aggressors, Charles left Italy,
and arrived at Prague on August 15 (1355).

During the king's absence from Bohemia order had been
much disturbed by bands of robbers, who rendered the
high-roads unsafe. Charles toek immediate steps to restore
security to his country, and — shortly after his return from
Italy — he besieged Zampach, a castle situated on the
summit of a steep hill belonging ^o John of Smoyno, the
leader of the most numerous of these bands of robbers.
John of Smoyno, who from his habit of always appearing in
full armour was known as " Pancif " (the man in armour),
had formerly served in the king's army, and had been
knighted by him for his bravery, and presented with a
golden chain. Zampach vras taken after a siege of some
duration, the castle destroyed, and the "Pancif" hanged
by order of the king. Charles is said to have himself
thrown the rope round his neck, telling him " that it vvas
not only golden chains that he had in his gift." Several
other strongholds of robbers in the same district (that of
Kralove Hradec), which had been the most disturbed part
of the country, were subsequently destroyed when the king
returned to Prague to assemble the Estates at a Diet. We
are specially told that the Estates, not only of Bohemia, but
also those of Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia, were convoked.

Charles proposed to the Estates the adoption of a code
of laws founded on those of Rome, but this proposal, as
being in many ways contrary to the old legal traditions of
Bohemia, was very unfavourably received. Charles, with his
usual prudence, very soon gave up these intended changes.
He succeeded, however, in obtaining the consent of the
Estates to several other legal dispositions, particularly to
those which guaranteed to the peasants the right of appeal-
ing to the royal law-courts against their territorial lords.
The necessity of this enactment proves that attempts had
already been made to introduce into Bohemia the system of
servitude which had long prevailed in Germany, though
serfs were entirely unknown to the original — Slavonic —
constitution of Bohemia.

In the same year (1355) Charles, after the termination of
the Diet of Prague, proceeded to Nuremberg, where an
assembly of the Electors and princes of Germany took
place. The deliberations which took place here, and which
were continued the following year at the Diet of Metz

An Historical Sketch 77

(1356), resulted in the publication of the celebrated Golden
Bull, in which the Emperor Charles attempted to codify the
regulations concerning the election of the kings of Germany.
The Golden Bull belongs rather to German than to Bohemian
history, but it may be noted that it contains a reaffirmation
of all the privileges formerly granted to the lands of the
Bohemian, and that it contained a special paragraph which
decreed that the sons of the Electors and other German
princes were to learn the Bohemian language, as it was a
language respected in the Empire and useful to them.^

The Golden Bull was not favourably received by the
Holy See, as its regulations concerning the election of
the German kings tacitly ignored certain undefined claims
to influence these elections which the Popes had several
times raised. The friendship between Emperor and Pope
decreased for a time, and the latter even favoured the plan
of certain German princes to depose the Emperor Charles.

The Emperor, though he has always by German historians
been accused of undue subserviency to the Holy See, showed
great firmness on this occasion. At an Imperial Diet, which
assembled at Maintz in 1357, the Emperor very strongly
opposed the demand of the papal legate who was present,
that a tithe should be collected from the German clergy for
the benefit of the papal court. Charles called on the bishops
to pay greater attention to the morals and conduct of their
clergy, and even threatened to seize the ecclesiastical
revenues should they not be more worthily employed.
Though the momentary estrangement between Pope and
Emperor may have been one of the motives of the energetic
language which Charles used, there is no doubt that the
Emperor, a man of earnest and unaffected piety, seriously
desired to reform the habits and morals of the clergy.

At no time, indeed, was such a reformation more necessary.
Warfare, tournaments, hunting, and gambling were widely
spread among the clergy, and immorality was almost
universal, the law of celibacy having fallen into complete
neglect.^ This degraded condition of the clergy produced

^ Tomek.

- Baron Helfert, Hus ujid Hieronymus, p. 18, says that the immorality
of the clergy was then so great that some parishes even considered it
desirable that their priests should live in concubinage, "hoc modo
proprias uxores tutiores ab insidiis existimantes." This cannot be
considered as a party statement, as Baron Helfert's book is written
from a strongly Catholic point of view.

78

Bohemia

an agitation during Charles's reign which was to develop,
under that of his son, into the Hussite movement, when
Bohemia for a time attracted the attention of all Europe.

The movement in Bohemia in favour of Church reform
v:as originally free from all hostility to the dogmas of the
Roman Catholic Church. The earliest leaders were among
"the truest and most obedient sons of the Church."^ As
the two earliest of these reformers, Conrad Waldhauser and
Milic of Kromefize,^ died before the Emperor Charles, it
will be as well to mention them here. Conrad Waldhauser,
a German by birth, was summoned to Prague by the
Emperor Charles in consequence of the great reputation as
a preacher which he had acquired in Austria, his original
home. In his sermons at Prague he at first inveighed
against the immorality and extravagance of the citizens, and
the result of his preaching w^as most extraordinary. The
women of Prague left off wearing jewels and costly dresses,
and many of the greatest sinners in the town did public
penance. Conrad then began attacking the corruption of
the clergy, particularly of the mendicant friars. He was
denounced both by the Dominican and Augustine monks,
but the Emperor continued his protection to him, as is
proved by the fact that he appointed him to the most im-
portant parish in Prague. Waldhauser therefore remained
unmolested by the priests up to his death in the year
1369.

Milic of Kromefize, who is also generally considered one
of the precursors of Hus, was a canon of the cathedral
of Prague, and for some time held the office of vice-
chancellor at the court of Prague. Most Bohemian
historians agree in attributing the Emperor's attitude at
the Diet of Maintz largely to the influence of Milic. In
T363 he suddenly renounced all his dignities, intending
in future to live in complete poverty, and for the one
purpose of preaching the gospel. As Milic — a Moravian
by birth — spoke the language of the country, his preaching
attracted more attention, and had a wnder influence on the
people, than that of Waldhauser.

On the other hand, he seems to have provoked greater
enmity on the part of the monks, whose view^s he very
openly exposed. They were therefore only too glad when

^ Baron Helfert, Hits ii/id IIierony?)ms, p. 18.
2 In German Kremsier.

An Historical Sketch 79

MiliS fell into what were considered errors of dogma. The
great corruption of the times appears to have inspired him
with the idea that the end of the world was near, and he
gave publicity to his views in a pamphlet entitled Libellus
de Antichristo. Milic started to Rome to defend himself,
and was imprisoned there during the absence of Pope
Urban. After the Pope's arrival in Rome an interview
between him and Milic took place, and the Pontiff, evi-
dently recognizing the purity of his intentions, ordered him
to be set at liberty. It has, however, been noted that Milic
henceforth laid less stress on his peculiar views concerning
the Antichrist, though he never formally withdrew them ;
his zeal for the reform of the Church became even greater
than before.

Milic returned to Prague immediately after his liberation,
and was received with great rejoicing by the people, if
not by the mendicant friars, who had considered his con-
demnation to death as certain.^ Milic now resumed his
preaching, and though advanced in years acquired the
knowledge of the German language so as to be able to
preach to the German inhabitants of Prague also. The
old enmity of the mendicant friars against the saintly
priest never seems to have grown less, and they — despairing
of harming him in Bohemia, where the protection of Charles
ensured his safety — again denounced him to the Papal See.
Milic again appealed to the Pope, and repaired to the papal
court at Avignon, where he died (1374), before his case had
been judged by the ecclesiastical tribunal. Besides Conrad
Waldhauser and Milic of Kromefize, Matthew of Janow, a
disciple of Milic, and Thomas of Stitny^ ^re also generally
counted among the precursors of Hus.

It is probable that these dissensions, the first beginning
of a movement that was to become of world-wide import-
ance, did not attract much attention at the time, and were
considered of hardly greater importance than the contro-
versies between the different religious orders, which were so

^ "Cumvero Pragam" — Milic and his companion — "venissent quasi
nova lux omnibus Christi fidelibus orta fuisset, ita gaudebant quia per
viros religiosos mendicantes saepe in eorum praedicationibus audiebant
ubi dicebatur : Carissimi ecce jam Milicius eremabitur " (from the
life of Milic contained in the learned Jesuit Balbinus's Miscellanea
Historica Repii Bohemiae, vol. iv).

^ For Thomas of Stitny see my History of Bohemian Literature^
pp. 63-79 (2nd ed.).

8o Bohemia

frequent at that time. The estrangement between Charles
and the Papal See was not of long duration, but the
Emperor always maintained his opinion as to the necessity
of Church reform.

Shortly after his reconciliation with the Pope, the
Emperor, who had for some time been at war with Duke
Rudolph IV of Austria and Louis, King of Hungary, con-
cluded a treaty (1364) with the former prince by which the
succession to the Bohemian crown was — in the case of the
extinction of the reigning family — assured to the house of
Austria, whilst the Austrian duke assured the succession to
his lands to the Bohemian kings should the dynasty of
Habsburg become extinct. As a similar treaty had already
been concluded between the King of Hungary and the
Duke of Austria, Hungary was included in this agreement,
which may be considered as the origin of the Austro-Hun-
garian Empire, such as it exists at the present day.

In the following year (1365) Charles proceeded on a
journey to Avignon to visit Pope Urban V. The purpose
of this visit is unknown, but it is probable that the Emperor
again wished to attract the Pope's attention to the question
of Church reform, and to what seemed to the Emperor
directly connected with this question, the transfer of the
papal court from Avignon to Rome. This appears for a long
time to have been a change on which the Emperor had set
his whole heart, and he was undoubtedly influenced by a
serious concern for the welfare of the Church. It was for
this purpose that Charles had at one time attempted to
obtain the papal throne for Ernest of Pardubic, Archbishop
of Prague, who would probably have willingly acceded to
the Avishes of the King of Bohemia, by restoring the seat of
papacy to Rome.

A great majority of the cardinals, particularly those who
were of French nationality, strongly opposed the transfer of
the papal court, as they did not wish to leave their own
country, and were also influenced by the state of insecurity
prevalent in Italy at that time.

From Avignon Charles made a short excursion to Aries,
to be crowned there as King of Aries, ^ a former dependency

1 " The kingdom of Burgundy or Aries {regnum Burgnndiae, regnum
Arelatense) included Provence, Dauphine, Savoy, the country between
the Saone and the Jura, and a considerable part of what is now Swit-
zerland. On the death of its last independent king, Rudolph, in 1002,

An Historical Sketch 8i

of the Empire, but of which the greatest part had already
been absorbed in the kingdom of France.

The Emperor's visit to the Pope, though only of ten days'
duration, was, on the whole, successful, as he had obtained
the Pope's promise to transfer the Holy See to Rome as
soon as Charles should be able to enter Italy with an army,
and protect the Pope against his enemies in that country.

On his return to Germany, Charles found that country so
disturbed by internal dissensions, that he was not immedi-
ately able to fulfil his promise to the Pope. It was only in
the year 1368 that Charles undertook a new expedition to
Italy, where he first forced Bernabo de' Visconti, Lord of
Milan, to sue for peace, and then marched to Rome to
visit Pope Urban V, who had already arrived there the year
before. Charles remained in Italy more than a year, but
was recalled by threatening news from the East. King
Louis of Hungary and King Casimir of Poland had entered
into an alliance for the purpose of limiting what to them
seemed the undue aggrandizement of the house of Luxem-
burg. They particularly wished to prevent the absorption
of Brandenburg in the already extensive hereditary dominions
of the Emperor Charles.

Margrave Otho of Brandenburg, son of the former
German Emperor Louis and husband of Catherine, daughter
of the Emperor Charles, had ceded the succession to his
margravate to his father-in-law, mainly on account of
loans he had received from him. Otho, principally through
the advice of King Louis of Hungary, now attempted to
deny the validity of this engagement, and declared his
nephew Frederick (son of his brother Stephen, Duke of
Bavaria) his heir. Charles considered this violation of his
pledge as a cause of war, and invaded Brandenburg (137 1).
After some fighting, Margrave Otho was obliged to submit,
as he was insufficiently aided by the King of Hungary, and
the death of King Casimir of Poland at this time frustrated
all hope of help from that country. An agreement was
arrived at (1373) through the mediation of the Pope — now
Gregory XL Otho renounced all his claims on Branden-
burg, even during his lifetime, on payment of a large sum
of money, and on the condition that the Emperor should

it came into the hands of the Emperor Conrad II, and henceforward
formed a part of the Empire. As early as the thirteenth century parts
of it fell into the hands of France " (Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire).
D

82 Bohemia

cede certain castles in the Upper Palatinate to him.
According to the wishes of the Estates of Brandenburg,
that country was incorporated with the lands of the
Bohemian crown, and thus became an object of more
direct interest to Charles.

By the annexation of Silesia, Lusatia, and Brandenburg,
the Bohemian kingdom had in itself become one of the
great European Powers, particularly as Charles had also
obtained possession of territories in Germany. Large
though isolated districts in the present kingdoms of Bavaria
and Saxony had become either domains of the sovereign of
Bohemia, or fiefs of the Bohemian crown, forming what
Palack)^ calls " Bohemian islands " in Germany. It seems
very probable that Charles planned the reconstruction of
the German Empire under the house of Luxemburg, and
with Bohemia as its centre. This plan, " had it succeeded,
would have transformed Germany into a monarchy such as
France was ; but it would undoubtedly have resulted in the
dissolution of the Bohemian nationality as such. " ^

It was certainly in view of these ambitious plans that
Charles, at the price of great sacrifices, induced the German
princes, during his lifetime, to proclaim his son Venceslas
as his successor (1376).

Charles died two years later (1378), at the age of sixty-
two, at a moment when his death was an even more
irreparable loss to Bohemia than it would have been at any
other time.

The death of Pope Gregory XI in ihe same year (1378)
marks the beginning of the great schism in the Western
Church which tended largely to give a revolutionary turn to
the movement in favour of Church reform already existing
in Bohemia. If such conjectures were not in themselves
futile, it would be interesting to speculate on the results
had Charles — not then a very old man — lived to a greater
age. As a man of acknowledged piety and learning,- faithful
to the dogmas of the Catholic Church, and yet thoroughly
convinced of the necessity of the reform of that Church, it is
probable that the part he would have played would have
differed much from that of his son and successor.

Charles, German Emperor and King of Bohemia, has
been very differently judged by the historians of the two

1 Palacky.

* Palacky calls him the most learned sovereign of his age.

i

An Historical Sketch 83

countries. It has been attempted in these notes to give
some idea— as far as a limited space allows— of the policy
by which Charles strove, and successfully strove, to raise
Bohemia to the rank of one of the great Powers of Europe,
and at the same time to secure for it a degree of prosperity
the country had never enjoyed before.

On the other hand, Charles has been very severely
criticized by the German historians. The title of " Pfaffen-
kaiser" (Emperor of the priests), which they usually give
him, is entirely unmerited, in so far as it implies undue
subserviency to the Papal See.^ The Golden Bull, which
very seriously curtailed the rights of the Popes as to the
elections of the kings of the Germans, the attitude of
Charles at the Diet of Maintz, the protection he afforded to
priests — such as Conrad Waldhauser and Milic of Krome-
fize — who were accused of heresy, sufficiently prove that
Charles was no bigot. That his disposition was truly and
unaffectedly religious is indeed clearly shown by his policy,
as well as by his own autobiography. Though he was
undoubtedly a sincere friend of the Bohemian nation it is
impossible to agree with the often-quoted appreciation of the
Emperor Maximilian, who called his illustrious predecessor
the "father of Bohemia but the stepfather of the Holy
Roman Empire."

Venceslas, son of Charles by his third wife, Anna of
Schweidnitz, was only seventeen years of age when he
succeeded his father. The Emperor's joy at again having
a male heir ^ was perhaps one of the causes of the excessive
fondness he showed for his son,^ of which he gave a proof
by causing him, when only two years of age, to be crowned
as King of Bohemia. Charles, as already mentioned, also
secured the succession to the German throne to his eldest
son. Of the two other sons whom Charles left, the one,
Sigismund, inherited Brandenburg, the other, John, a part
of Eusatia. Charles's brother, John Henry, had died three
years before him, and had been succeeded by his eldest son

^ It is curious to find these appreciations of German authors — largely
founded on national antipathies — repeated by such modern English
writers as Carlyle and Mr. J. R. Green.

2 A son of Charles by his second wife, Anna of the Palatinate, also
called Venceslas, was born in 1350, but died in 1351.

2 Palacky tells ns that Charles, anxious to obtain as tutor for his son
the most learned man of his age, offered that post to Petrarch, who,
however, declined it.

84 Bohemia

Jodocus — or Jobst. Of the other sons of John Henry, one,
Prokop, who played a somewhat important part in the
troubles that soon broke out in Bohemia, inherited lands in
Moravia, while the other became Bishop of Litomysl, and
afterwards Patriarch of Aquileja.

In the beginning of his reign Venceslas, still surrounded
by the old, experienced councillors of his father, gave proof
of the best intentions for the welfare of his country. He
attempted to rule the country on the same principles as
Charles, and also endeavoured to suppress the schism in the
Western Church, then the all-important matter of interest in
the whole of Europe. The schism began almost simultane-
ously with the accession of Venceslas, and its influence on
the religious disputes of Bohemia can hardly be overrated.
The practice adopted by the rival claimants to the papal
throne of excommunicating each other, and of employing
the most terrible threats known to mediaeval theology against
the adherents of their rival, brought these weapons of ecclesi-
astical warfare into discredit, and undermined the authority of
the Church, which had been already weakened by the attacks
of Waldhauser and Milic on the immorality of the clergy.

After the death of Pope Gregory XI (1378) the cardinals
had elected as Pope Bartolomeo Prignani, Archbishop of
Bari, who assumed the title of Urban VI; but some of
their numbers, probably influenced by the French court,
which desired the return of the Popes to Avignon, disputed
the validity of the election of Urban VI, as having been
forced on the cardinals by the menacing attitude of the
Roman people. They assembled at Fondi, in the kingdom
of Naples, and chose as Pope Cardinal Robert of Geneva,
who assumed the name of Clement VII. The Emperor
Charles had, during the last months of his life, warmly
defended the validity of the election of Pope Urban,^ and
Venceslas at first endeavoured to continue his father's
policy. At the Imperial Diet which assembled at Frankfort
in 1379, Venceslas induced the German princes to recognize
Urban VI as legitimate Pope, and to renounce all connection
with " Robert of Geneva, the so-called Pope Clement VII."

^ Palack^ tells us that Charles, in the last months of his life, wrote
letters to the dissenting cardinals urging them to recognize Pope Urban,
and that he also wrote to Queen Joan of Naples, entreating her to
afford no aid to the cardinals who were then assembled in Neapolitan
territory.

An Historical Sketch 85

It was even declared that in case of the death of Venceslas
nobody should be chosen as his successor who had not
previously declared that he recognized Urban VI as the
legitimate head of the Church.

The able counsel of the old ministers of the Emperor
Charles, on whose advice he had attempted to restore unity
to the Church, and who had guided him at first in the
government of Bohemia,^ soon began to fail the king, and
he gradually fell under other and very different influences.
Venceslas more and more incurred the enmity of the higher
nobility and of the great State officials by the favour he
showed to persons of lower rank, knights and citizens, on
whom he even — to the great indignation of the nobles —
conferred court dignities. The very scanty records we have
of the earlier part of the reign of Venceslas contain repeated
— probably not unfounded — complaints of the increasing
laziness and drunkenness of the king, whose character seems
gradually to have deteriorated.

The friendship between France and Bohemia, which had
become less intimate during the last years of the reign of
Charles, ceased entirely in consequence of the support given
by Venceslas to Pope Urban VI. Shortly after, and to a
certain extent in consequence of this event, a family alliance
between the houses of Plantagenet and Luxemburg took
place. As the King of France supported the claims of
Pope Clement VII, Venceslas hoped to secure for Urban
the adherence of England, then the perpetual adversary of
France. He addressed a letter to Richard II, informing
him that he and the German princes, including his brother
Sigismund, recognized Urban VI as the legitimate Pope,
and intended to support him. The King of England
evidently agreed with the views of Venceslas, for he for-
warded a copy of this letter to Peter, King of Arragon,
exhorting him also to recognize Pope Urban, The agree-
ment between the two sovereigns as to the then all-important
question of the legitimate succession to the papal throne
was shortly followed by a treaty by which the two royal
families became connected.^ Through the envoys of the

^ "At least during the first fifteen years of the reign of Venceslas
public order and tranquillity were as secure (in Bohemia) as daring the
reign of his father " (Tomek).

'^ Want of space renders it impossible to enter into details as to the
matrimonial negotiations.

86 Bohemia

two sovereigns, a marriage between King Richard and
Anne, daughter of the late Emperor Charles and sister of
King Venceslas, was arranged. A treaty was at the same
time concluded, by which both sovereigns again pledged
themselves to recognize Pope Urban and his legitimate
successors. It was further stipulated that the subjects of
King Richard should be allowed to come to the (German)
empire and Venceslas's own lands for purposes of trade,
and remain there without hindrance. No reciprocity was
granted with regard to the Bohemian and German merchants.
" The munificent bridegroom granted his future brother-in-
law a loan of 20,000 golden guldens, for which no guarantee
was claimed. The deed, which was signed by the envoys,
provided that the claim on the money lent to King
Venceslas should be invalid from the moment that Princess
Anne arrived in England or at Calais. It is therefore not
surprising that the people of England should have said that
Venceslas had sold them his sister — particularly as King
Richard also promised Venceslas to pay the sum of
80,000 golden guldens to him within a fortnight of the
arrival of Princess Anne in English territory." ^ On
December 13, 1381, the Bohemian princess landed at
Dover, and we are told that she brought with her a copy of
the Bible written in Latin, Bohemian, and German. There
seems to be no doubt that the Bohemian princess kept up a
correspondence with her country, so that it is possible,
though not probable, that she — according to the general
supposition — contributed to making the teaching of Wycliffe
known in Bohemia.

The ever-increasing hostihty in Bohemia against the
clergy, particularly its higher orders, at that time extended
to the king also, and^to the favourites who surrounded him.
One of these, John Cuch of Zasada, who held the office of
Court Marshal, became involved in a^ quarrel with John
Jenstein, now Archbishop of Prague, for a very paltry
cause.2 The king energetically took the part of his
favourite, and caused the archbishop, who had attempted
to secure his claim by force, to be imprisoned in the

^ Dr. Hofier, Anna von Lttxevdnirg, Konigin von England.

2 The archbishop accused Zasada of having constructtd a weir on the
river Elbe near the lands of the archbishop, and caused the weir to be
forcibly removed by his retainers. In the stru!];gle which ensued fire-
arms are said to have been used for the first time in Bohemia.

An Historical Sketch 87

fortress of Karlstein ; he even permitted Zasada to revenge
himself on the archbishop by plundering the archiepiscopal
lands. This quarrel was finally made up, but the feeling at
court against the archbishop became even more bitter than
before. John of Jenstein certainly did not assume a
conciliatory attitude. At a moment when the anti-clerical
feeling was so strong in Bohemia, and when the Church was
weakened by its division, he attempted to enforce claims
that would have been challenged even in quieter times.
The question as to the limits of temporal and ecclesiastical
jurisdiction at that period caused great difficulties, as persons
enjoying clerical immunities often committed the greatest
excesses. In the year 1392 the archbishop excommunicated
the king's vice-chamberlain, because he had ordered several
students of theology — who had, however, not yet been
consecrated as priests — to be arrested, and two of them to
be executed. The vice-chamberlain had taken this action
with the full approval of the king. The archbishop did not
deny the justice of the punishment, but he complained of
the infringement of the ecclesiastical immunities.

The excommunication of one of his officials for actions
done with the knowledge and approval of the king violently
irritated him, and another incident that occurred shortly
afterwards raised the fury of the irascible king to the highest
pitch. He had planned the foundation of a new bishopric
in Bohemia, probably by the advice of the ecclesiastics at
his court, who coveted the new appointment. Venceslas
only waited for the death of the Abbot Racek of Kladrau
to suppress that convent and endow the new bishopric with
its revenues. No opposition was to be feared from
Pope Boniface IX,^ with whom the king was on terms of
friendship. The archbishop, however, frustrated the
plans of Venceslas by sending to Kladrau his vicar-general,
John of Pomuk, who induced the monks, immediately
after the death of Racek, to choose a new abbot, whose
election Pomuk, in the name of the archbishop, immediately
confirmed.

The king's fury now knew no bounds. The court officials
very imprudently arranged a meeting between Venceslas
and the archbishop. On seeing the latter the king was
quite unable to control his fury. He ordered John of

^ Boniface IX had succeeded Urban VI in 1389. In 1394 Benedict
XIII succeeded Clement VII as anti-Pope at Avignon.

88 Bohemia

Jenstein and the ecclesiastics who accompanied him to be
immediately arrested. The archbishop escaped by the pro-
tection of his armed retinue, but the four ecclesiastics who
were with him, and among whom was John of Pomuk, were
thrown into prison and put on the rack by order of the king.
Venceslas insisted that they should give a written promise to
abandon the archbishop, and act in future according to the
king's wishes. Three of them immediately submitted to the
demands of Venceslas, but John of Pomuk refused to do so,
and was so cruelly tortured that his death became certain,
whereupon he was thrown into the river Vltava.^

The archbishop meanwhile fled to the court of Pope
Boniface at Rome, but he received little encouragement
from him. The schism in the Western Church made it
impossible for the Pope to risk alienating the friendship of
the German king, the most important of his adherents
among the reigning princes. Finding no support in Rome,
John of Jenstein returned to Bohemia, and soon after
voluntarily renounced his position as Archbishop of Prague

(1393)-

Venceslas had, on the whole, been successful in reducing
the clergy of Bohemia to obedience, but he now found him-
self confronted by a confederation of the Bohemian nobles,
which became known as the " League of the Lords," and to
which many of his nearest relations adhered — some secretly,
some openly. The leaders of the confederacy were Henry,
Lord of Rosenberg, and the king's cousin, Jocodus of
Moravia. Albert III, Duke of Austria, and William, Mar-
grave of Meissen, also joined the league. Venceslas's
brother Sigismund, King of Hungary,^ appears to have
played a double game. While assuring Venceslas of his
friendship, he was all along in complete understanding
with the league.

The nobles who belonged to the league accused the king
of various misdeeds, but their main purpose was undoubtedly

* The legend of St. John of Ne'pomuk derives its origin from this
occurrence. At the time of the canonization of St. John Bohemian history
was only known in Western Europe through the utterly unreliable
chronicle of Hajek of Libocan.

' Sigismund had (1385) married Mary, daughter of King Louis of
Hungary, and had (1387) been crowned as King of Hungary. The
expenses he incurred in maintaining his position in that country forced
him to sell Brandebourg (1388) to his cousin, Margrave Jodocus of
Moravia.

An Historical Sketch 89

to restrict his rights as to the appointments to the great
State and court offices. They therefore demanded a promise
from the king that he would in future govern according to
the advice of State officials, whom he was to choose
among the higher nobility : on his refusal they attacked him
in his castle of Beraun, and conducted him to Prague as a
prisoner. The lords of the league then declared Jodocus of
Moravia "starosta" (dictator).^

Venceslas contrived to communicate secretly with his
brother John, Duke of Gorlitz (in Lusatia), and succeeded
in obtaining aid from him. The people of Bohemia, who
had no cause to complain of Venceslas, even took up arms
in his favour, so that when Duke John arrived at Prague he
was amicably received by the citizens. Further help arrived
from Margrave Prokop, who had long been at enmity with
his brother Jodocus, and Venceslas was also supported by
several of the German princes, who were indignant at the
imprisonment of the King of the Germans. The lords of
the league were, at the time, unable to oppose such numerous
adversaries, and though they at first obliged Venceslas to
follow them as a prisoner, they soon saw the necessity of
conditionally restoring him to freedom. The only condition
demanded appears to have been a complete amnesty for the
lords of the league, which was guaranteed by Duke John in
the name of his brother, who refused to enter into any
negotiations till he had recovered his liberty. Almost
immediately after his liberation Venceslas endeavoured to
make preparations for renewed warfare against the league of
the lords, but his efforts to form a party were entirely un-
successful. After the death of Duke John (1396) the king
was obliged to ask his brother Sigismund, King of Hungary,
and even Margrave Jodocus, to mediate between him and
the nobles of Bohemia.

The agreement which, through the mediation of King
Sigismund, was now obtained, corresponded entirely to the
wishes of the league. Venceslas undertook to appoint
members of that league to all the important State offices.
The head of the league, Henry, Lord of Rosenberg, became
burgrave, and Margrave Jodocus remained at Prague
practically usurping the regal powers. Irritated by the

^ This title, derived from the earliest times of Bohemian histor)%
ensured to its bearer almost unlimited power, so that the authority of
Venceslas became purely nominal.
D2

90 Bohemia

overbearing attitude of Jodocus, Venceslas shortly afterwards
banished him from Bohemia, and on his departure for
Germany left the Margrave Prokop — now for some time his
most trusted councillor — as his representative in Bohemia.

The presence of Venceslas was at that moment very
necessary in Germany. The want of firmness he had lately
shown in the administration of his hereditary lands had
encouraged his enemies in Germany, at whose head was the
ambitious Elector Palatine Ruprecht. He summoned a
Diet of the Empire to Frankfort (1398), but this step was
taken too late to disarm his enemies, who were already
planning his deposition. From Germany King Venceslas
proceeded to France to consult with King Charles VI as to
the means of ending the papal schism. The two sovereigns
decided that both Popes should abdicate, and that the
united assembly of the cardinals should elect a new
Pope.

This settlement was naturally displeasing to Pope Boniface,
and when Venceslas informed him of his wish that he should
abdicate, he became an enemy of the king, and consequently
a supporter of the Elector Palatine. Countenanced by
Boniface, the three ecclesiastical Electors deposed Venceslas
(1400), accusing him of neglecting the affairs of the Empire
and alienating lands belonging to it,^ and in his place chose
Rupert, Elector Palatine, as King of the Germans. En-
couraged by Rupert, the lords of the league had in 1399
again taken up arms against their king.

A new internal struggle began in Bohemia, of which we
have very scanty record, but in which the Confederates on
the whole had the advantage. Venceslas was again obliged
to come to terms with his enemies, and to appoint a
council from among the principal nobles of the country, a
point that had always been the principal object of the
league of the lords. The new Archbishop of Prague, Wilfram
of Skvorec, and Henry, Lord of Rosenberg, were to hold the
principal offices of State. Venceslas about this time suc-
ceeded in detaching Margrave Jodocus from the Confederacy
by giving up Lusatia to him for his lifetime.

King Sigismund of Hungary had not been able to inter-
fere during the new troubles, as he had at that time been

^ This referred to the fact that Venceslas had conferred the title of
Duke of Milan on John Galeazzo de' Visconti without consulting the
Electors.

An Historical Sketch 91

imprisoned by the rebellious Hungarian nobles, who
behaved towards him very much in the same way as the
Bohemian lords had formerly done to Venceslas. King
Venceslas was much grieved by the imprisonment of his
brother, whom he believed to be his friend, and it was
principally through his efforts and financial sacrifices that
Sigismund at last regained his liberty.

Foolishly relying on the gratitude of his younger brother,
Venceslas hoped to be able with his help to throw off the
mastership of the State officials, whom he had been obliged
to appoint, and who had practically annulled the power of
the Crown. Venceslas invited Sigismund to Bohemia as
soon as he had regained his liberty, and associated him as
co-regent in the government of the country. He wished
his brother to accompany him to Italy, intending at last to
journey to Rome for his coronation. Sigismund abused
the confidence of his credulous brother in the most in-
famous way. During the journey he seized Venceslas as a
prisoner, and by his own authority appointed Bishop John
of Litomysl Governor of Bohemia, intending to deprive
Venceslas entirely of his sovereignty over that country.
Margrave Prokop, whom Venceslas had again appointed
regent, was imprisoned by order of Sigismund, As an
insurrection against the unconstitutional rule of Bishop
John broke out almost immediately, Sigismund hastened
back to Bohemia, leaving Venceslas as a prisoner in the
custody of his ally, the Duke of Austria. Sigismund was
on the point of opening hostilities against the Bohemian
towns that adhered to King Venceslas, w-hen an insurrection
in Hungary recalled him to that country, and for the time
freed Bohemia of his presence.

Shortly afterwards (1403) Venceslas succeeded in escap-
ing from Vienna, where he had been imprisoned by the
Duke of Austria, and he speedily returned to Bohemia.
He was this time cordially received, even by his former
enemies, whom the outrageous extortions of Sigismund had
alienated. The league of the lords was voluntarily dissolved,
and Venceslas again became undisputed ruler of Bohemia.

The movement in favour of religious reform, which com-
menced during the reign of King Charles IV, had constantly
increased in the ten years during which the struggle between
Venceslas and the Bohemian nobles had lasted. Wald-
hauser and INIilic had died before the accession of Venceslas ;

92 Bohemia

but Matthew of Janow had gone a step further than his
predecessors, as — besides inveighing against the notorious
immorality of the clergy — he also attacked several dogmas
of the Church. He was indeed persuaded to withdraw his
heretical statements, but this in no way impeded the growth
of the movement, which, through the agency of John Hus,
was soon to become of world-wide importance.

It has often been asked why the general degradation of
the clergy and the scandal caused by the schism, seeing
how common they were to the whole Western Church,
should have aroused in Bohemia a wider movement than
in any other country. One of these reasons is generally
supposed to be the influence of Wycliffe in Bohemia, and
it is certain that his writings were more studied at the
University of Prague than in many places nearer England,
and that several of his doctrines were defended by Hus.
The influence of Queen Anne of England has also been
put forward as facilitating knowledge in Bohemia of occur-
rences in England, and from the queen's pious disposition it
is not unlikely that the correspondence she carried on with
relations and friends in Bohemia contained allusions to
theological matters. The fact of the possession by the
queen of a Bible in the vulgar tongue (a fact already
mentioned), has been made an excuse for many suppositions,
but there is no direct evidence that the queen favoured any
movement for Church reform either in England or in
Bohemia.

If the writings of Wycliffe attracted more attention in
Bohemia than elsewhere, it is because the soil was already
prepared for religious changes. The movement against the
Roman Church was, on the whole, an indigenous one, and
was to a great extent caused by the national differences
between Germans and Bohemians.

The Bohemian language, which had been neglected at
court and in the towns during the reigns of the last Pf emysl-
ides, had increased in importance under Charles, and still
more under Venceslas. The principal causes of this change
date from the reign of King Charles ; they were the crea-
tion of the Archbishopric of Prague, by which Bohemia was
detached from the German Archbishopric of Maintz, and
the foundation of the "new town" of Prague in v/hich —
contrary to the customs of the older town — the Bohemian
language was used for the purpose of administration and

An Historical Sketch 93

justice. A further step in the same direction was the
decision of Venceslas that all decrees of the court and the
Government, for which hitherto either the German or the
Latin tongue had been employed, should henceforth be
published in Bohemian. We also find at this period an
increasing movement among the Bohemian clergy in favour
of preaching in the native language, even in the towns ; and
it is probable that the example of Milic of Kromefize, whose
sermons had so deeply stirred the people, contributed largely
to induce the clergy to use the native language for their
sermons.

The national party, as soon as it had gathered strength,
began to view with displeasure the condition of the Prague
University, the great intellectual centre of the country. The
management of the university, and therefore the right to
confer the numerous dignities, professorships, and prebends
which were in its gift, was entirely in German hands. It has
already been mentioned that the university was divided into
four "nations"; and as the Polish "nation," particularly
after the foundation of the University of Cracow, was largely
composed of Germans from Silesia and Pomerania, the Slav
Bohemians found themselves in a permanent minority in
their own country ; this was considered particularly unfair,
as the university had been founded and endowed at the
expense of Bohemia. A movement against the predominance
of the Germans began as early as 1385, when the Bohemians
specially attacked the appointment of foreigners to the offices
of the university. The Archbishop of Prague, to whom
both parties appealed, decided in favour of the Bohemians,
declaring that preference should be given to them, and that
Germans should in future hold the offices of the university
only in the absence of a fit Bohemian candidate. The
Germans appealed to the Pope, and a compromise was at
last obtained, according to which five of the great university
dignities were always to be held by Bohemians, whilst the
sixth one should alternate in the sequence that after two
consecutive German occupants one Bohemian should always
follow. This compromise only postponed temporarily the
national struggle at the university, and it was inevitable that
when a leader appeared in whom both the religious and the
national tendencies of the country were personified, an
outbreak must occur.

Such a leader was found in John Hus. Before giving

94 Bohemia

what, for want of space, must be a very short sketch of his
career, 1 it will be well to mention one of the theories as to
the origin of the Hussite movement. It is connected with
the now uncontested fact that the struggle between the
German and the Slav race was the principal cause of that
movement.

It has been said by Bohemian writers since the seven-
teenth century, and it has recently been re-affirmed,
especially by Russian historians, that the Hussite movement
was not caused by a desire for Church reform, as were the
other movements that subsequently took place in the
Western world, but that it was rather a movement in favour
of joining the Eastern Church; and that "Hus himself was
of the orthodox Church (pravoslaw) in his views, his actions,
and his endeavours." ^

The Eastern origin of Christianity in Bohemia, the exist-
ence from remote times of the monastery of St. Prokop on
the Sazava, which celebrated the services of the Church in
the Slav language, the revival of the traditions of that mon-
astery by the foundation of a Slavonic Benedictine convent
by Charles IV, the fact that the celibacy of the clergy and
the administration of the Communion to laymen in one
kind only were introduced into Bohemia far later than into
other lands subject to the Western Church, are the principal
points in favour of this theory.

The positive statement of Palacky^ — the standard au-
thority on Bohemian history up to 1526 — that in spite of all

^ For a full account of the career of Hus, I must refer my readers to
my Life and Times of Master John Hus.

2 Professor Kalousek, in a very remarkable article on "Russian
Researches on the Causes and Objects of the Hussite Movement,"
published in the Journal of the Bohemian Museum for 1882. The
learned professor is strongly opposed to this theory, which it would
perhaps be hardly necessary to notice were it not that its veiy general
acceptation in Russia gives it a certain importance. In the article
mentioned above, Professor Kalousek says (quoting from a recent
Russian writer), that the theory of the Greek "orthodox" origin and
tendency of the " Hussite movement has, in Russia, been introduced
into the school-books as an uncontested fact ; it is maintained by people
otherwise of the most divergent opinions ; we hear of it from theologians
and publicists on the most varied occasions, at Hus's jubilee, and at
the foundation of the Greek Church at Prague, at the Slav Congress at
Moscow (1867), and on the occasion of the Old-Catholic movement in
Germany ; everywhere they remind us of the ' orthodox ' tendencies of
the Bohemians."

^ Palacky, Bbhmische Geschichte^ vol. iii. bk. vi. chap. iii.

An Historical Sketch 95

researches among contemporary records he was unable to
discover any trace whatever of Greco-Slavonic religious
traditions at the period we refer to, may be considered as
decisive.

It is possible that the religious and national aspirations
of Bohemia would not have had the world-wide importance
which they attained had it not been for John Hus, who is
undoubtedly the most prominent representative of the
Czecho-Slavic race in the the world's story.

John Hus was born at Husinec in Southern Bohemia, of
parents who, though of humble birth, appear to have been in
comparatively affluent circumstances. The date of his birth
is uncertain ; the most recent writers place it between 1373
and 1375. He studied at the University of Prague, at
which he obtained the rank of " Magister " (M.A.) in 1396.
He became Dean of the faculty of Philosophy in 1401, and
Rector of the university, for the first time, in 1402. His
marvellous eloquence as a preacher from the first attracted
attention, and it does not seem to have impeded his career
that, about the year 1399, he was already accused by some
of his colleagues of maintaining doctrines contained in the
writings of Wycliffe which the Council of Blackfriars had
already condemned. These accusations also in no way pre-
vented his gaining great favour both with the people and
with the court ; and Queen Sophia, wife of Venceslas, about
this time appointed him her confessor. A large part of
the nobility and particularly the courtiers and favourites
of Venceslas, then openly supported Hus. " Among the
Bohemian laymen of the highest rank there were enhght-
ened men who were thoroughly interested in the spiritual
requirements of their age; others also who had from old
entertained a feeling of envy towards the superior eccle-
siastics because of their wealth and immunities, and viewed
with favour the hostile movement against them among the
lower clergy and the people. The courtiers of Venceslas
almost all belonged to one or the other division of the
furtherers of the movement which strove to obtain Church
reform." 1

The estrangement of the king from Pope Boniface

naturally embittered the courtiers against the higher clergy,

who had maintained their allegiance to Boniface ; though

Sigismund, while ruling Bohemia during his brother's

1 Tomek.

96

Bohemia

captivity, had attempted to detach the country from its
allegiance to that Pope. Sigismund had (1403) instructed
the Bohemian clergy not to obey any orders received from
Boniface, who had previously called on the German princes
to dethrone the house of Luxemburg, and to recognize the
Elector Palatine as king. It may be added that Boniface,
not having the whole revenue of the Church at his disposal,
had aroused great indignation by exacting enormous sums
for his confirmation of bishops and archbishops, and had
even established a rule that the benefices in his gift, when
vacant, or even when a vacancy was expected, should be
publicly sold to the highest bidder.^

It will thus be seen that the Hussite movement was at
first favoured by the queen and court, and was then by no
means the democratic movement which it afterwards became.

There was only one element in Bohemia that was from
the very first hostile to the new movement, and that was the
German party, both in the towns and at the university.
The doctrines of Wycliffe had been freely expounded at the
university in 1402, during which year Hus was Rector, and
several of his friends, also belonging to the Bohemian
"nation," held high appointments there. The German
members of the university, both from national and from
religious motives, opposed these doctrines, and when Walter
Harasser of the Bavarian "nation" was Rector in the
following year he convoked a general meeting of the
university, which declared that forty-five articles taken from
the writings of Wycliffe contained heresies, and forbade all
members of the university to circulate them. Hus and the
Bohemian " nation " protested against the decision, as they
maintained — not without some truth — that the articles that
had been read out were falsified, and did not convey
Wycliffe's meaning. This debate was the first public mani-
festation of the reform movement. The Bohemians were
greatly incensed at having been outvoted by the Germans,^
and neither this decision, nor the subsequent prohibition
addressed by the archbishop to the clergy of preaching the
doctrine contained in the forty-five articles, interrupted the
reform movement to any great extent. In 1408 the forty-

1 Tomek.

2 The compromise of 1385 had made no change in the system that all
important votes at the university were taken by "nations," a system
that left the Bohemians in a permanent minority of three to one.

An Historical Sketch 97

five articles were again brought before the university, or
rather before the forum of the Bohemian "nation," in which
alone these doctrines had found adherents. The articles
were again condemned, but with the limitation "that no
member of the Bohemian 'nation' was to defend these
articles in their false, erroneous, or heretical sense." As
Palacky remarks, this restriction rendered the whole pro-
hibition illusory.

During all this period the still-protracted schism in the
Church reacted on the religious struggle in Bohemia. As
both the Roman Pope, Gregory XII, and the Avignon Pope,
Benedict XIII,^ refused to renounce their claim to be con-
sidered the rightful Pontiff, the cardinals of both parties
had — supported by the kings of Germany and France —
decided that a Council should settle the question, and that
in the meantime neither of the two claimants should be
recognized as head of the Church.

Venceslas immediately attempted to enforce this decision
in his hereditary lands, and on the refusal of the Archbishop
of Prague to renounce his allegiance to Gregory XII he
deferred the matter to the Prague University, a step entirely
in conformance with the ideas of the time. Another general
assembly of the members of the university now took place
(1408), under the presidency of the Rector, Henry of
Baltenhagen, a German. By the votes of the three German
"nations," which overruled the Bohemian suffrages, it was
decided that the university should continue to recognize
Gregory XII as head of the Church.

Venceslas, who was then residing at Kutna Hora, sum-
moned there representatives of both parties at the university,
wishing to consult them on the subject of the deposition of
Pope Gregory. The German deputation, headed by the
Rector, Baltenhagen, was first received by the king. Bal-
tenhagen cunningly avoided alluding to the subject on
which his opinion had been asked, and drew the king's at-
tention to the prevalence of " Wycliffism " in Prague. He
declared that the good fame of Bohemia as a country free
from heresy was imperilled. This was a point on which
Venceslas felt very strongly. When, therefore, Hus and
Jerome, as leaders of the Bohemian deputation, appeared

1 Pope Boniface IX died in 1404, and was succeeded by Innocent
VII, and then (1406) by Gregory XII. Benedict XIII had (1394)
succeeded Clement VII as anti-Pope at Avignon.

98

Bohemia

before him, he received them very ungraciously. He
accused them of fomenting disorders, and threatened
them with death at the stake. Baltenhagen and the other
Germans left Kutna Hora, assured that all their privileges
at the university would be maintained.

The ever-vacillating king, in this instance, was again fated
not to adhere to his first decision. Through the influence
of those among his courtiers who favoured the national
movement and the cause of reform, Venceslas was soon
persuaded to accede to the wishes of the Bohemian party
at the university, and to change the system of voting. He
therefore published in January 1409 the famed "decree ot
Kutna Hora."^ This decree ordained that the Bohemian
" nation ^ should henceforth have three votes, and the com-
bined foreign " nations " only one vote, both in the general
deliberations of the university and in those of the separate
faculties. The first result of this innovation was that the
university, according to the wishes of the king, now decreed
that Pope Gregory should no longer be recognized in
Bohemia, and the clergy of the country should abide by
the decision of the Council. Another more important
consequence of the king's decision was that the German
professors and students, considering themselves injured in
their rights, left Prague to the number of about five thousand
(i409).2 Only the German members of the Polish " nation "
joined in the emigration ; those who were of the Slav race
remained, and became part of the Bohemian "nation," with
which their sympathies had been enlisted during the previous
struggle. Hus, now the recognized leader of the national
party, was elected Rector (1409), though he had served in
that capacity only a few years before.

The reform movement naturally gathered increased
strength from its success, and the university, formerly its
opponent, now took the lead in furthering this movement,
of which it henceforth became the centre. On the other
hand, many of the patriotic nobles and other sympathizers
with the claims of the Bohemian nationalists had little
interest in theological details, or animosity against the

^ A full account of the decree of Kutna Hora will be found in my
Life and Times of Master J. Hus, p. 105.

^ This seems to be the most probable number, though a contemporary
Bohemian writer tells us that 20,000 German members of the university
left Prague.

An Historical Sketch 99

Church of Rome. These, considering that the object of
the national party had been attained, gradually abandoned
the party led by Hus ; for not only had the university — the
great centre of political life in Bohemia — fallen into the hands
of the nationalists, but they shortly afterwards also obtained
the municipal control over many towns.

The hopes that the Council then assembled at Pisa
would undertake Church reform (hopes that at that
moment were entertained by many fervent adherents
of the Church of Rome) proved futile. The Council may
indeed be said to have rendered the situation of the
Western Church even more difficult than it had been
before. The Council (1409) deposed both Gregory XII
and Benedict XIII, and chose Alexander V as Pope,^ but
as the two other Popes, Gregory and Benedict, continued
to be recognized in some countries, there were for a time
three popes simultaneously. It is curious to note that at
the same period, on the death of Rupert of the Palatinate
(1401), some of the German Electors chose King Sigismund
of Hungary, and others his cousin Jodocus, the Margrave
of Moravia, as German king. Venceslas (as has been
previously mentioned) having also claimed that title, the
German kingdom had three kings at the same moment as
the Roman Church had three popes. Jodocus died (141 1)
only three months after his election, and Venceslas and
Sigismund now came to an agreement. The terms are
not exactly known, as contemporary writers, entirely
occupied with the ecclesiastical strife then raging in
Bohemia, give little information on other matters. Ven-
ceslas, ever too confident in his treacherous younger
brother, not only consented to the election of his brother
as German king, but even assured him his own vote.
Sigismund, on the other hand, promised to favour in every
way his brother's election as Roman Emperor. Sigismund
was soon afterwards, and this time unanimously, chosen as
king by the German Electors (141 1).

The failure of the Council of Pisa to achieve or even to
attempt any reform of the Church, undoubtedly encouraged
the higher clergy of Bohemia to oppose more energetically
than before the reform movement in their own country.
Zbynek Zajic of Hasenburg, archbishop of Prague, had
not at first been hostile to the movement in favour of
^ He was succeeded in the following year by John XXIII.

lOO Bohemia

Church reform. He soon noticed the piety and eloquence
of the young priest, John Hus. He even appointed him
preacher to the synod, and entrusted him with important
missions. It was only gradually that Hus lost the favour of
his ecclesiastical superiors, and only from the end of the
year 1408 did the Church of Rome consider him as an
open enemy. After having obtained the consent of the
pope, Zbynek decided to strike a decisive blow against the
Hussite party. He issued a decree ordering that all writings
of Wycliffe, wherever they were found, should be burnt;
and he prohibited all preaching except in parish or college
churches, or in convents. This was directly aimed at Hus,
who generally preached in the so-called Bethlehem Chapel,
which was a private foundation. Disregarding the appeal
that Hus had addressed to Pope John XXHI, the arch-
bishop soon afterwards excommunicated Hus for continuing
to preach. At the same time a large number of manuscripts
containing Wycliffe's writings were publicly burnt at Prague
by order of the archbishop. Venceslas may at this time be
considered as still siding with the national party — probably
in consequence of the influence of Queen Sophia, who
remained warmly attached to Hus. He ordered the arch-
bishop to indemnify the owners of the manuscripts which
had been destroyed, some of which were of great value,
and seized on part of the revenues of the archbishop and of
other higher ecclesiastics. He also wrote to the Pope in
favour of Hus, and When the latter was summoned to
Rome, Queen Sophia ^ addressed a menacing letter to the
cardinals, warning them "that if the Holy College did
not find means to arrange this matter, the king and the
Bohemian lords would soon see their way to settling it
according to their views." Both the king and the national
party at court indeed still maintained that Hus had uttered
no heresy, and that it was his German accusers who dis-

^ Baron Helfert, writing strongly from the papal point of view,
severely blames Queen Sophia, and pronounces a general and rather
severe judgment on the female sex: "Women have with rare ex-
ceptions, noted in history, no tact, no independent judgment as to how
public affairs should be conducted. ... In pohtics, as in household
matters, they are led more by sentiment than by sense. If a man is at
their side . . . they are attracted by his political views, and generally
go further than he does" (Helfert, Htis unci Hieronymius). Of course
the supposed influence of Hus over Queen Sophia, whose confessor he
was, is alluded to.

An Historical Sketch loi

turbed the quiet of the country. The king's letter to the
Pope was at first without result, and the Archbishop of
Prague, indignant at the loss of part of his revenues, placed
the town of Prague under an interdict, thus prohibiting all
religious ceremonies.

At this time occurred one of the many temporary and
insincere reconciliations between Venceslas and his brother
Sigismund, and there appeared to be some hope of a
peaceful ending of the ecclesiastical conflict in Bohemia.
Pope John temporarily suspended the proceedings which
the Roman courts had already begun against Hus; and
Sigismund, during a visit to his brother at Prague, induced
the archbishop to remove the interdict from the town, and
even to use his influence in favour of the suppression of
the proceedings against Hus in the Roman ecclesiastical
courts. The hopes of those who wished to end the
ecclesiastical strife in Bohemia were raised by the death
of Archbishop Zbynek, and by the choice of M agister
Albik as his successor. Albik had long been physician to
the king, whose thorough confidence he enjoyed. This
was undoubtedly the principal cause of his election ; though
it is unfortunately probable that he — as was then so
frequently the case — made use of bribery to obtain the
pope's consent to his election. Magister Albik, then
already an elderly man, was only known as one of the first
medical men of his age; although in his youth he had
been admitted to the lowest of minor orders, that of
acolyte, he had been married, but was now a widower.

Albik is described by all contemporary writers as a man
of conciliatory disposition, and the intimate relations he
enjoyed with the king render it certain that his purpose
was the appeasement of Bohemia. It was natural to hope
that the election of Albik, an elderly, conciliatory, opulent
man, would at least cause a respite in the theological strife
that agitated Bohemia.

Events in distant Italy, however, brought on a crisis
which was more serious than any of the former disturbances
in Bohemia. Ladislas, King of Naples, still supported the
cause of Pope Gregory, and war consequently broke out
between the king and Pope John. The latter proclaimed
a crusade against Ladislas, and promised indulgences to all
those who by contributions of money would aid him in the
equipment of his army. Preachers sent by the Pope arrived

I02 Bohemia

at Prague (141 2). Preceded by drummers they entered the
city, and established themselves in the market-place. They
called on all passers-by to contribute money or goods in
exchange for indulgences. The sale of indulgences had
been one of the abuses which the Bohemian Church-
reformers had from the first most strenuously opposed.
Hus, in his Bethlehem Chapel, spoke strongly against the
granting of these indulgences, which he said were given to
aid in -the slaughter of the soldiers of Ladislas, who could
but obey their king. At the same time he disclaimed all
intention of taking sides in the quarrel between the two
Popes.

Hus also succeeded — contrary to the wishes of the arch-
bishop— in bringing the question of the indulgences before
the university. A very stormy meeting of the professors,
magisters, and students took place under the presidency of
the Rector of the university, Hus and Magister Jerome of
Prague violently inveighed against the sale of indulgences,
which they declared to be unchristian. The fiery eloquence
of Jerome appealed to the younger students even more than
that of Hus, and at the end of the disputation they conducted
him home in triumph.

Jerome of Prague — who had led a wandering life, visiting
among other places Oxford, where he had copied some of
Wycliffe's writings — had first become known in Bohemia by
a speech he made (1410) in favour of WycHfife's doctrines.
Pie had then left Bohemia, and had now only just returned
to that country, which he again quitted shortly afterwards.
It may here be noticed that the influence of Jerome on the
religious movement in Bohemia, from which country he was
often absent, has been greatly over-rated. His visits to
many countries and courts, and the eloquent letter in which
Poggio Bracciolini described his death,^ attracted the atten-
tion of all Europe to him at a period when the political
condition of Austria and Bohemia rendered inquiry into the
details of the Hussite movement an impossibility.

The echo of the stormy debates at the university still
further excited the people of Prague, already much moved
by the sermons of Hus in the Bethlehem Chapel. To
prevent disturbances, the magistrates of Prague, by order
of Venceslas, issued a decree forbidding any one under
penalty of death to discuss the papal decrees pubHcly ; this,
^ See later.

An Historical Sketch 103

of course, specially referred to the sale of indulgences. In
accordance with this decree, three young men who ventured
to interfere with the vendors of the indulgences were seized
and publicly executed. A band of students obtained posses-
sion of the corpses, and singing the Church hymn "Isti
sunt sancti " carried them for burial to the Bethlehem
Chapel. This incident marks an important date in the
Hussite movement, which now for the first time assumed a
revolutionary character. The Pope replied to these attacks
on the authority of the Church by renewing in severer terms
the decree of excommunication against Hus : all true Chris-
tians were forbidden to have any intercourse with him, food
and drink were to be suppHed to him only under pain of ex-
communication; all religious services were to be suspended
in every town which he entered ; finally, Christian burial was
to be refused him, and the Bethlehem Chapel was to be
destroyed. The Germans, obeying the orders of the Pope,
attempted forcibly to take possession of the chapel, but were
repulsed by the adherents of Hus.

The king, being still anxious to reconcile the contending
parties, begged Hus temporarily to leave Prague, and he
immediately obeyed the request of Venceslas. The king
promised to endeavour during his absence to put an end
to the conflict, so that his exile might not be of long
duration.

Archbishop Albik, finding that his conciliatory attitude
had only resulted in raising up enemies against him among
both the contending parties, now resigned his office. He
was succeeded by Conrad of Vechta, formerly Bishop of
Olomouc. The new archbishop, on the suggestion of the
king, convoked a synod of the clergy (14 13), but its
deliberations had no satisfactory results, as the reform
party still maintained that changes in the government of
the Church could alone restore order ; while the supporters
of the Pope declared that the suppression of all resistance
to ecclesiastical authority was the only measure required to
obtain peace. A special commission was now appointed
by the king, before which the more prominent divines
of both parties were summoned to appear. Still the
adherents of Hus, on the whole, maintained a conciliatory-
attitude, while the partisans of the Pope practically declined
any sort of compromise with men whom they considered as
heretics. King Venceslas, whose honesty of purpose it

I04 Bohemia

is impossible to deny, and who evidently wished to ignore
the details of theological strife and to restore peace to
his kingdom at any price, was greatly incensed by the
attitude of the ecclesiastics of the papal party. Four of
them — among whom was Stephen of Palec, afterwards
Hus's chief accuser at the Council of Constance — were
exiled from Bohemia by order of the king.

Hus, on leaving Prague, had retired to the castle of
Kozi Hradek, belonging to one of his adherents. Lord
John of Austi, and which was situated near the spot
where the town of Tabor was shortly to spring up. Both
while staying there, and during his stay at the castle of
Krakovec, the seat of Lord Henry of Lazan, one of the
king's courtiers, who also belonged to the reform party,
Hus continued his preaching : it often took place in the
open fields, and the neighbouring peasantry flocked to it
in large numbers. Many of his writings, both Latin and
Bohemian, date from this period, and it is noticeable
that he now, more strongly than before, affirmed that the
Bible was the only true source of Christian belief. This
position necessarily incensed the adherents of the papal
authority more than almost any other could have done.

King Sigismund had meanwhile repaired to Italy, where,
during an interview with Pope John at Lodi (1413),^ he
obtained the Pontiff's unwilling consent to summon a
General Council of the Church at Constance. King*
Venceslas believed that the Council would afford him
the best means to put an end to the rehgious dissensions
in his kingdom, and Sigismund, with his brother's approval,
summoned Hus to appear before the Council of Constance.
He also assured him of such ample protection as that he
should " come unmolested to Constance, there have free
right of audience, and should he not submit to the decision
of the Council, he should return unharmed.^ Hus there-

^ Richenthal, in his entertaining though unreliable Chronik des Con-
staiizer Concils, tells us that the Pope, even after he had consented to
proceed to Constance, expressed great displeasure during the journey.
His imprecations and curses terrified the pious peasants who flocked
to see him. When he was crossing the Arlberg, his carriage was
overturned. He then said: *' Here I lie in the name of the devil."
When in sight of Constance he exclaimed, ** Sic capiuntur vulpes."

2 These important words arc quoted froiii Professor Tomek, who
may be thought one of the first Bohemian authorities on this period.
'The arguments of Bohemian and German writers as to the exact

An Historical Sketch 105

fore received a letter of safe-conduct from Sigismund, and
Venceslas appointed three Bohemian nobles who were to
accompany and assist him on the road. Hus started on
his fatal journey to Constance in October (1414)- He
was to meet there most of his Bohemian adversaries,
Stephen of Palec, who had been exiled by King Venceslas,
several of the former German magisters of the University
of Prague (who wished the fact that his influence on the
king had contributed to bring about the secession of the
German students to be included in the act of accusation),
and above all John — surnamed "the Iron" — Bishop of
Litomysl, perhaps the most violent of all the enemies of
Church reform. The latter, before starting for Constance,
had caused a collection to be made in his diocese to
aid him in his defence of the existing system of Church
government.

Principally through the influence of the " Iron " Bishop of
Litomysl, Hus was imprisoned almost immediately after
his arrival at Constance. Sigismund only made his entry
into the town somewhat later on Christmas Eve (1414),
when the Bohemian lords immediately complained to him
of the imprisonment of their countryman. The king was
thoroughly aware that violent measures against Hus would
produce troubles, perhaps even a revolution in Bohemia,
but his sympathies were entirely on the side of the Roman
Church. The well-known remarks he afterwards made to
several of the cardinals, advising them to have Hus burnt if
he did not retract, and warning them not to trust him even
if he did so,^ sufficiently prove this. A feeble protest was
therefore the only effort he made in favour of Hus, and this
was ignored by the council.^ When Pope John XXIII,

'meaning of Sigismund's letter of safe-conduct, and the degree of
security which it insured, would alone fill a large volume. Baron
Helfert, who may be considered as holding a brief for King Sigis-
mund, asserts that the king's letter only assured the safe arrival
of Hus at Constance, though Hus started on his journey long before
receiving it ! It will seem to many that Baron Hclferc's clever book
rather proves that King Sigismund was thoroughly aware of the
disastrous consequences which violent measures against Hus would
produce in Bohemia, and showed more foresight than the members
of the Council, than that he was more scrupulous in dealing with a
•' declared heretic " than they were.

^ Palacky.

^ For a full account of the trial and death of Hus, see my Life and
Times of Master John Htis.

io6 Bohemia

after his destitution by the council, secretly left Constance
on March 20, 1415, Hus became the prisoner of Sigismund,
who had full power to set him free. The Emperor, how-
ever, instead of doing so placed Hus in the custody of the
Bishop of Constance, who imprisoned him in his castle of
Gottlieben. He was here treated with far greater cruelty
than at Constance. The frequent steps taken by the
Bohemian nobles then present at Constance to obtain the
liberation of Hus were also ineffectual. Yet they had at
least that result, that the forms of justice were to a certain
extent observed, and that Hus was not condemned entirely
without trial. Hus, who had been conducted back to Con-
stance early in June, first appeared before the Council on
June 5. His trial continued on June 7 and 8. He was,
hov/ever, never allowed freely to express his views and was
treated with great unfairness and brutality. Many of the
accusations were utterly absurd, ^ but others, for instance,
that he rejected papal authority and recognized that of the
Holy Scriptures only, he himself admitted. He wished to
argue this and other propositions, but the Council refused
him permission to do so, and insisted on a complete and
general retractation of all the heretical doctrines which had
been attributed to him. This he refused, preferring to die
rather than retract with his lips opinions that he held in his
heart.

After June 8, some time was allowed to elapse, as
attempts were still made to induce Hus to retract his
opinions. When this appeared impossible he was on July
6 brought before the Council and for the last time called on
to recant. On his refusal the Council immediately declared
him. a recusant heretic. This, according to the barbarous
laws of the time, entailed death by burning. Hus was
given over to the magistrates of Constance, who caused him
to be led directly from the cathedral, where the Council held
its sittings, to a meadow half-a-mile from the city walls.
The cruel sentence was then immediately carried out.
When the fire had already been kindled and Hus was
surrounded by the flames, his loud prayers could still be
heard. His sufferings happily did not last long, as a strong
gust of wind suddenly blew the smoke in his face, and he

^ For instance, that Hus had denied that there were only three
Persons in the Godhead, and maintained that there was a fourth,
namely, John Hus.

An Historical Sketch 107

was suffocated. His ashes were thrown into the Rhine, to
prevent the Bohemians from carrying away any relics of
him to their country.

The career of Hus has almost always been discussed
from the point of view of theological controversy; whilst
many have extolled him as a martyr, others have described
him — as did the Council of Constance — as a " recusant
heretic." His sincere piety, his conviction of the truth of
his opinions, which he was ready to maintain at the cost of
his life, his perfect disinterestedness in one of the most
corrupt periods of history, and the personal purity of his life,
no impartial student of those times can deny.

In Bohemia, whose inhabitants instinctively saw in Hus
the greatest man of their race, he was from the first revered.
Hus the Bohemian patriot is loved even by many of his
countrymen who are devoted adherents of the church of
Rome. The national church of Bohemia from its beginning
conferred on Hus — as will be mentioned presently — the
well-deserved name of a martyr.

Before referring to the momentous consequences which
the death of Hus entailed on Bohemia, we must notice the
end of Jerome of Prague, who, prior to the time when
researches concerning the Hussite movement had become
possible in Bohemia, was generally placed at the side of
Hus as the most prominent of his disciples.

No greater contrast can be imagined than the lives of
Hus and of Jerome. Whilst Hus had hardly ever left Bohe-
mia before his fatal journey to Constance, Jerome had visited
Palestine and many European countries, and had been
received at various courts, where his learning and his
attractive manners had gained him many friends. Jerome
had, however, several times been imprisoned for uttering
heretical opinions, and after a journey to Constance, where
he had visited Hus, he was arrested near that town while on
his way back to Bohemia and thrown into prison. His
trial lasted some time, and he at one time — probably from
physical fear — recanted those opinions which the Council
considered to be heretical. He later again affirmed these
opinions and was thereupon condemned to death and burnt
(May 30, 1416).

The description of the trial and execution of Jerome
given by the papal legate Poggio Bracciolini is well known ;
and is intensely interesting, as representing the views of an

io8 Bohemia

Italian humanist/ who in spite of his official position could
have had but little interest in the subtilities of the theolo-
gical discussions of his age. Poggio Bracciolini tells us that
" none of the Stoics with so constant and brave a soul
endured death, which indeed he (Jerome) rather seemed to
long for . . . Mutius did not allow his hand to be burnt
with more brave a mind than this man his whole body.
Socrates did not drink the poison as willingly as this man
submitted himself to the flames." ^

After Hus's departure from Bohemia, the movement
against papacy in that country by no means declined, but
rather assumed greater dimensions. Towards the end of
the year 1414, one of the most prominent magisters of the
University of Prague, Jacobellus of Stribro, first publicly
preached the doctrine that, according to Scripture, the
sacrament should be received in both kinds by laymen as
well as by priests. Jacobellus and his friends at this time
also began to dispense communion in the two kinds. This
was first done at Prague in the churches of St. Michael, St.
Martin-in-the-Wall, and the Bethlehem chapel. This
practice — concerning which Hus was consulted, and to
which he gave his approval — soon became the characteristic
article of faith to which all the friends of Church reform
in Bohemia adhered. The chalice indeed became their
emblem, and the nobles opposed to the Pope were known
as the lords "sub utraque,"' whence was derived the word
utraquist, which, till the suppression of religious freedom in
Bohemia after the battle of the White Mountain (1620),
designated one of the parties in the country.

1 "The independence of mind with which this learned member of
tlie papal curia (Poggio Bracciolini) dared to admire the heroism of
. . . (Jerome) and proclaim him. worthy of immortality is truly
remarkable. But what was it he admired in him ? Not the martyr,
not the reformer — on the contrary, he asserts that if Jerome had indeed
said anything against the Catholic faith he would have deserved his
punishment. What he admired in him was the courage of a Cato or a
Mutius Scaevola ; he extolled his clear, sweet, and sonorous voice, the
nobility of his gestures, so well adapted either to express indignation or
excite compassion ; the eloquence and learning with which at the foot
of the pile he quoted Socrates, Anaxagoras, Plato, and the Fathers "
(Prof. Villari, Life of Machiavelli).

2 Poggii Florentini de Hieronymi HeretUi Supflicio Narratio
Lionardo Aretino (first [?] printed by Von der Hardt, Magnum
Concilium Oecumenicum ; then with the Historia Boheinica of Aenaeas
Sylvius in Freherus Scriptores Rerum Bohemicarum^ and elsewhere).

An Historical Sketch T09

It is almost unnecessary to state that when the news of
the execution of Hus reached Bohemia the greatest excite-
ment prevailed in the country. All the priests at Prague
who were opposed to Hus and his teaching were expelled
from their parishes, and in the country also the lords of the
reform-party appointed Hussite priests to the livings that
were in their gift, expelling the form.er Romanist occupants.
Bishop John of Litomysl, the most important among the
adversaries of Hus, who was accused of having at the
Council incited foreigners to hatred and contempt against
his country, also severely felt the results of the national
movement. His vast estates were forcibly seized by the
neighbouring nobles, so that he was — as Palacky says — for
the first time relieved from all cares with regard to temporal
possessions.

King Venceslas showed great displeasure when he was
informed of the death of Hus. Queen Sophia also made
no secret of her indignation at the treacherous cruelty with
which her confessor had been treated. The nobles and
knights of Bohemia assembled without delay at Prague
(September 2, 141 5), to deHberate on the perilous situation
of the country, and they were joined by a large number of
Moravian nobles. The result of their deliberations was a
protest against the execution of Hus couched in the
strongest terms,^ which was forwarded to the Council of
Constance. It was immediately signed by ninety-nine
nobles and knights, and was afterwards sent to many
sympathizers who had not been able to be present, so that
it finally bore the signatures or seals of four hundred and
fifty-two lords and knights. In this protest the Bohemians
declared that the Council had unjustly executed Hus, "a
good, just and catholic man who consistently loathed all
errors and heresies." They further complained that some
traitors had unjustly accused the Bohemians of being
heretics. This letter caused great indignation among the

^ This document has often been printed under the name of Protestatio
Bohemorum. The edition published by Dr. Loder, and printed at
Leipzig in 1712, contains the notice that Dr. Loder had copied it at
Oxford from an English manuscript entitled: **A true Copy of the
Bohemian Protestation against the Council of Constance for burning
of John Hus and Hieronymus Prage Conlrare to their safe conduct they
had given. Given to the university library of Oxfort, Dec. 2, 1695, by
Mr. Anderson, Keeper of the publick Library at Edinburgk." I have
retained Dr. Loder 's spelling.

no Bohemia

members of the Council, and their indignation became yet
greater when the news reached Constance that most of the
nobles and knights had, a few days after their first protest,
united in a solemm covenant for mutual defence. They
pledged themselves to defend the liberty of preaching the
word of God on their estates ; to accept no orders from the
Council ; to obey the future Pope and the bishops of
Bohemia, but only should their commands not be in con-
tradiction with the Scriptures ; and in the meanwhile to
recognize the University of Prague as the supreme authority
in all matters of doctrine. They finally pledged themselves
to act in common during the duration of the covenant,
which, it was agreed, was for the present to be of six years.
King Venceslas himself was invited to join the covenant
and to become its head ; but he declined to do so, probably
out of fear of his brother Sigismund. The lords who
favoured the papal party, few in number, but among whom
were some of the most powerful nobles, now also united in
a league, and pledged themselves to continue obedient to
the universal Church and to the Council.

The answer of the Council to the declaration of the
nobles was a very firm one, and contained nothing con-
ducive to appeasing the excited Bohemians. Jacobellus of
Stribro and the priests who shared his views, as well as the
four hundred and fifty-two Bohemian knights and nobles
who had signed the protest, were summoned to appear for
judgment before the Council. It was with difficulty that
King Sigismund prevented the Council from beginning
proceedings for heresy against King Venceslas and his
consort.^

These decrees were entirely ineffective as regards Bohemia,
the greater part of that country having, for the time being,
entirely renounced the allegiance of the Roman Church.
Though the archbishop renewed the interdict over Prague,
his own vicar-general, Herman, was induced by the supreme
burgrave Cenek, Lord of VVartenberg, to consecrate a number
of new priests without previously requiring from them the
promise that they would not distribute the sacrament in

^ The act of accusation against Queen Sophia, which had aheady
been prepared, accused her of having confirmed Hus and other heretics
in their obstinacy ; of having treated the papal decrees with open con-
tempt ; and of having expelled the Romanist priests from her private
estates, replacing them by Plussites,

An Historical Sketch 1 1 1

both kinds to laymen — a promise always enacted by the
Roman Church.

The University of Prague, accepting the important position
the nobles had conferred on it, declared (141 7) that com-
munion in both kinds was necessary to the salvation of the
soul, and it shortly afterwards proclaimed Hus a holy martyr
for the faith of Christ, and decreed that July 6, the day of
his martyrdom, should be consecrated to his memory.^ The
party of reform, which now had its centre in the university,
favoured by the king and queen, and supported by the larger
part of the nobility together with the great majority of the
people, was in a very favourable position, particularly as for
the present no immediate danger of foreign intervention was
to be apprehended.

Unfortunately for Bohemia, differences of opinion soon
began to spring up among those who supported the cause
of Church reform. A considerable party gradually formed
itself in Bohemia, which, in direct antagonism to the Uni-
versity of Prague (now the recognized theological centre of
the country), professed doctrines that went far beyond any-
thing the earlier reformers had asserted. This advanced
party rejected the mass and all the sacraments, except
baptism and communion, the doctrine of the existence of
purgatory, and many of the rules and regulations of the
Church. Its adherents maintained that the Holy Bible
was the sole authority in all matters of religious belief. This
party — destined afterwards to become celebrated under the
name of the Taborites — had its centre in the little town of
Austi or Usti on the river Luznic, near the spot where the
town of Tabor was soon to arise. The University of Prague
from the first opposed the tenets of these more advanced
reformers, and several times (141 7 and 1418) issued decrees
informing the faithful that the Christian doctrine was con-
tained, not only in the Bible, but also in the traditions of the
Church, which were only to be rejected when manifestly in
contradiction to Scripture. These differences gradually be-
came more accentuated, and the dissentient parties received

^ In the earliest printed Bohemian almanacks, some of which are
preserved in the National Museum at Prague, the 6th of July is called
the Day of Commemoration of Master John Hus. It was long kept as
a holiday, and in 1592 the Roman Catholic Abbot of Emaus (at Prague)
was attacked by the people and threatened with death because he had
let some of his labourers work in his vineyards on the 6th of July.

112 Bohemia

separate denominations ; the moderate, or, as Palacky calls
it, the aristocratic party, becoming known as the Calix-
tines or Praguers, the town and university of Prague being
their centre ; while the more advanced or democratic party
received the name of the Taborites, from that of the new
town which was founded near Austi. These local denomina-
tions must, as Palacky tells us, not be taken too literally.
Prague contained many Taborites, and Austi counted some
supporters of the Calixtine party among its inhabitants.

The people of Bohemia had, by this time, so entirely dis-
sociated itself from the doings of the Council of Constance,
that — writing of Bohemia only — it is scarcely necessary to
notice its further deliberations. The Council had succes-
sively deposed John XXIII, Gregory XII, and Benedict XIII,
and elected Martin V, who became undisputed Pope. The
question of Church reform, which the Council had at first
undertaken to discuss, was entirely discarded, and the
Council was soon (141 8) closed by Pope Martin V.

Before leaving Constance the Pope confirmed all the
former decrees of the Council against the Bohemians. He
declared all those who still maintained the doctrines, which
the Council had condemned, to be heretics. He further
exhorted Sigismund to use his influence on his brother
Venceslas, to compel him to extirpate heresy in his domin-
ions, and he seems at this moment already to have meditated
a crusade against Bohemia.

That country now found itself entirely isolated m Europe,
while the larger part of it — for the Germans in Bohemia
had always upheld the cause of Rome — was in antagonism
with the whole Western world. The separation of Bohemia
from Rome may be said to have lasted over two hundred
years, though the position of the country became a different
one after the rise of Protestantism in Germany.

Sigismund was not long in obeying the Pope's command.
In the concluding year of the Council of Constance (141 8)
he addressed a letter, or rather a public manifesto — for it
was widely circulated in Bohemia — to his brother, reminding
him of his reiterated promises to allow no heresies in his
dominions, in consequence of which promises Sigismund
had prevented the intended excommunication of Venceslas.
He further warned him of the severe measures and the
crusade which were under contemplation to reduce Bohemia
to the papal authority ; and ended by declaring that should

An Historical Sketch 113

Venceslas not endeavour to extirpate in his kingdom all
opinions contrary to Rome, he would no longer consider
him as his brother.

It would have required a firmer mind than that of
Venceslas not to have been greatly agitated by the menaces
contained in this letter of his younger brother. His position
appeared to him a hopeless one should he have to encounter
the whole force of Europe in a crusade (a word that only
lost its terror during the subsequent Hussite wars), for not
only did his rule extend over a comparatively limited terri-
tory, but it was further weakened by the German element
in the towns, which always furthered foreign intervention, and
by the seditious attitude of the extreme adversaries of papacy.

It is, therefore, perhaps not surprising that Venceslas
decided to comply with the wishes of his younger brother,
and to attempt, as far as lay in his power, to restrain the
anti-papal movement in Bohemia. He issued a decree
ordaining that all priests, both in Prague and in the country,
who had been expelled from their parishes because they
refused to administer the sacrament in both kinds, should
be allowed to return and resume their functions. This
measure, as was inevitable in consequence of the excited
condition of Bohemia, caused great disorder. Venceslas
had, however, permitted that the use of three churches in
the city of Prague should be granted to those who received
the communion in both kinds, and the inhabitants of the
country districts, deserting the parish churches when they
were again under the direction of the papal clergy, assembled
on the hills or in other secluded spots, to which they gave
biblical names, such as Tabor, Oreb, the Mount of Olives,
and others. Here the religious services were held in the
Bohemian language, and communion administered in both
kinds by the Hussite priests.

The fact that religious service, according to the rites then
accepted by a large majority of the inhabitants of Prague,
was limited to three churches in the town, appeared unfair
to the townsmen, and Nicholas of Hus,^ one of the courtiers
of King Venceslas, but a firm adherent of the Calixtine
party, became their leader. When Nicholas was march-
ing through the streets of Prague at the head of a band

^ The similarity of names led many of the older writers on Bohemian
history to the quite erroneous supposition that he was a relation of
John Hus.

114 Bohemia

of Calixtines, he accidentally met the king, to whom he
addressed an earnest petition entreating him to cause a
larger number of churches to be allotted to those who
communicated in both kinds. Venceslas was very in-
dignant at this attempt to extort concessions from him,
and ordered Nicholas of Hus to leave Prague.

Nicholas retired to Austi, where a large number of the
more advanced Church-reformers and many priests, who
had been driven from their parishes by the decree of
Venceslas, flocked to him. On a hill near Austi, probably
on the site of the present town of Tabor, a large assembly
took place (July 22, 1419), at which more than 42,000
people, men and women and children from all parts of
Bohemia, and even from Moravia, were present. Even
Roman Catholic writers describe this first great meeting
of the Taborites as a most imposing event. From all
directions bands of Taborites marched to the trysting-
place, priests carrying the sacrament heading the proces-
sion. They were enthusiastically received by those already
assembled on the hill, and welcomed as ** brothers" and
" sisters." The whole day was spent in prayers, in confes-
sion and communion, the strictest order being maintained.
There is, however, little doubt that Nicholas of Hus availed
himself of this opportunity to deliberate with the leaders of
the assembled multitude as to the steps they were to take
to defend their faith against the authorities at Prague. It
is certain that at the court of Venceslas the design of seiz-
ing the Bohemian crown with the aid of the more advanced
religious reformers was seriously attributed to Nicholas of
Hus.

Trouble nearer home was destined to put an end to the
life of King Venceslas before the plans of Nicholas had
arrived at any sort of maturity. On July 30, 141 9, when a
procession of Calixtines, led by the priest John of Zelivo
who (as had now become the custom) carried the holy
Sacrament, marched through the streets of Prague, a stone
was thrown at priest John from one of the windows of the
town-hall of the Nove Mesto (new town). The exasperated
people, led by one of the king's courtiers, John ^izka of
Trocnov, stormed the town-hall, and the burgomaster and
several of the town-councillors were thrown from the win-
dows, those of them who survived the fall being killed by
the crowd in the market-place below.

An Historical Sketch 115

As we here first meet with John 2^izka of Trocnov, to
whom it was undoubtedly due that the Hussite movement
did not collapse at once, and that Bohemia was enabled
to resist the whole of Europe in arms against her, it will be
well shortly to notice the early life of the great warrior. ^

John ^izka was born about the year 1378, probably at
Trocnov, a small estate in Southern Bohemia, which was
the seat of his family. Hardly anything is known of his
early youth except that he was engaged in hereditary feuds
with the Lords of Rosenberg, then the most powerful nobles
in Southern Bohemia. About the year 141 2 he became
attached to the royal court, in all probability as chamberlain
of Queen Sophia; he had at that time already lost the
use of one eye, probably fighting for the king against the
Bohemian nobles, in one of the many contests which
occupied so large a part of the earlier years of the reign
of King Venceslas. Zizka only followed the example of
the great majority of the courtiers of Venceslas in joining
the party of reform, of which he immediately became (and
continued to be until his death) a thorough and disinterested
supporter. His previous knowledge and experience of war-
fare at once designated him as the natural leader of a party
which was directed by priests, and which consisted mostly
of peasants, small landowners, and townsmen, entirely un-
used to the system of v/arfare that was practised in those
days.

^izka, who undoubtedly was the greatest military genius
of his age,2 immediately saw the difficulty of opposing his
forces, consisting almost entirely of infantry, to the attack
of heavily-armed horsemen. A flail mounted with iron, a
club, or a short spear were the arms with which the peasants
and citizens were in the habit of fighting, and with such men

1 The standard authority regarding Zizka is now Professor Tomek,
whose Jan Zizka was published (in Bohemian) in 1879, The learned
professor has since published some additions to this biography in the
Casopis Mtisea Ceskeho for 1892. The history of the great Bohemian
warrior had formerly been completely obscured by legends and more or
less absurd inventions. ^Palacky makes the interesting remark that,
of those who wrote of Zizka before circumstances permitted serious
study of the period of the Hussite wars, only George Sand, with singular
intuition, grasped some of the traits of the character of Zizka in her short
work entitled Jean Zyska, though her only authority was Lenfant's
Guerre des Hussites.

* Palacky, with but slight exaggeration, calls him the originator of
modem tactics.

ii6 Bohemia

and such weapons he was now to prepare to encounter the
chivalry of Europe.

The hradba vozova (wagon-fort or lager of wagons),^ it
not absolutely Zizka's invention became, entirely through
him, a serious feature in Bohemian warfare. From the
scanty and contradictory accounts that have reached us it
appears that the wagons or chariots of the Bohemian armies
were linked together by strong iron chains, and were used
not only for defence, but also for offensive movements. All
the warriors, except the few horsemen as well as the women
and children who accompanied the armies, found shelter in
these wagons, which in time of battle were generally formed
in four lines or columns. The wagons were covered with
steel or iron — iron-clad, to use a modern term — and the
best marksmen were placed next to the driver of each of
them. In case of defeat, the wagons formed what was
practically a fortified entrenchment. When an offensive
movement was undertaken, the drivers of the wagons at one
end of the line of battle attempted to outflank the enemy,
and after Zizka's men had become accustomed to warfare,
often succeeded in doing so. It may be noticed that the
wide plains of Bohemia, which then — as now — were little
intersected by ditches or fences, offered every advantage to
this novel system of warfare. Zizka also seems to have
given his attention to fire-arms, as the picked marksmen
whom he placed next to the drivers of the wagons soon
became the terror of the Germans, through the precision of
their fire, whilst the few and unwieldy field-pieces which
accompanied the Bohemian armies were yet far superior to
anything the Germans and other enemies could then bring
to battle against them. It cannot be denied that the success
of Zizka, in creating out of a crowd of townsmen, small
farmers, and farm-labourers an almost invincible army, at the
head of which he defeated the bravest knights and warriors
of Europe, is almost unique in history. It is perhaps
fantastic to suggest some resemblance between Oliver

* Since writing the above I have had the opportunity of reading Mr.
Hereford B. George's interesting work entitled, Battles of Eno^lish
History. I here find that at the * ' Battle of the Herrings " (1429) Sir John
Fastolf, who commanded the English troops, "formed his wagons in
square, within which extemporized fort his men stood on the defensive."
Mr. George very truly remarks that " the lager, which is a feature now
well known of African warfare, is the same thing in principle."

An Historical Sketch 117

Cromwell and the one-eyed leader of the Bohemian people,^
though ^izka's piety and simplicity, his sincerity for what
he considered the welfare of his country, his unbending
sternness towards those whom he considered as God's
enemies, have a strong element of the Puritan about
them.

It is certain that 2izka felt more keenly than most
Bohemians the news of the death (or, as he no doubt
regarded it, the murder) of Hus.^ It is said that King
Venceslas, noticing one day at court that Zizka seemed
melancholy and absorbed in thought, asked him the cause
of his depression. Zizka answered : " How can I be gay
when our trusted leaders and the faithful teachers of the
law of the Lord are, by the order of infidel priests, un-
deservedly and unjustly condemned to the flames?" The
king answered : " Dear John, what can we say to that ? Can
we alter that ? If you know of any way to do so, right it
yourself. We shall be pleased." Zizka took the king at his
word, and said with his permission he would do so.^

If this report as to his momentary feelings is correct — of
which there is no doubt — Venceslas did not long remain in
the same frame of mind. When the news of the defenestra-
tion of the burgomaster and of other officials of the new
town of Prague reached the king at the neighbouring castle
of Kunuratic, his fury was so great that he was seized with
a slight apoplectic attack.

He now wrote to King Sigismund inviting him to come
to Bohemia to aid him in maintaining the royal authority ;
but before his brother could arrive, a renewed fit of apoplexy
put an end to the life of King Venceslas (August i6, 1419).
Little need be said as to this Bohemian king. The un-
certainty of purpose which was the most characteristic
feature of his character is evident even from this slight
notice of his life. His intentions were generally good, and
he was by no means as devoid of intelligence as has often been
stated by his detractors. In the last years of his life his

^ When first writing this, I was quite unaware of the faj:t that the late
Bishop Creighton had some time previously compared Zizka to Oliver
Cromwell .

2 The tale that Zizka, standing beneath the oak-tree under Avhich he
had been born, swore eternal vengeance to the murderers of Hus, is
merely a legend. It has furnished the Austrian poet Lenau with the
subject of one of the finest scenes of his Bilder aus dem HussiUnkriege.

' Tomek,yflw Zizka.

ii8 Bohemia

consort Queen Sophia acquired a very favourable influence
over him.

It is certain that he oppressed Bohemia with taxation less
than many other sovereigns, and therefore was popular with
the people during his whole life.

The news of the death of the king caused renewed dis-
turbances at Prague. The churches and convents which
were in the hands of the Romanist clergy were attacked, and
the priests and monks driven out of them. A great part of
the higher clergy, and most of the German inhabitants, who
were almost all opposed to the national or reform party, now
fled from Prague. Disturbances also broke out in all the
towns where the population was Bohemian, specially at
Kralove Hradec, Laun, and Pisek. These troubles rendered
necessary the presence of Sigismund, over whose religious
views great uncertainty at first prevailed. Nobles of both
parties assembled at Prague, and begged King Sigismund,
as heir to the throne, to proceed to Bohemia as soon as
possible. A petition was also signed begging the king to
grant to the Estates and to the people permission to continue
to receive the communion in both kinds. The king was
further requested to use his influence with the Pope to
induce him to revoke the interdict, and to grant the
Bohemians liberty to receive the sacrament in that manner
in which their consciences required them to do so. Sigis-
mund gave an evasive answer, merely saying that he would
rule as did his father, Charles IV, whose memory he knew
to be very popular in the land. His appointment of Queen
Sophia as regent, and of Cenek of Wartenberg as her first
counsellor, were, however, considered conciliatory. Queen
Sophia's Hussite sympathies were well known, whilst
Cenek was then considered a utraquist, though it is not easy
to know what were the real opinions of a man who changed
sides twice within a year. The nobles of the utraquist or
Calixtine party were therefore for the present in favour of a
peaceful policy, hoping that when Sigismund arrived in
Bohemia he would see the necessity of tolerance towards
a party to which the large majority of the nobles and knights
belonged, as also the town population — with the exception
of the Germanized citizens of some towns— and almost the
whole of the peasantry.

The more advanced reformers judged the intentions of
Sigismund differently, and, as events proved, more correctly.

An Historical Sketch 119

The meetings of the adherents of the extreme party, the
first of which, held near Austi, has already been mentioned,
still continued ; the movement soon spread all over Bohemia
and parts of Moravia ; and the endeavours even of the utra-
quist nobles to calm the people were ineffectual. These
meetings took the place of the pilgrimages to which the
Bohemian peasants had been accustomed, and they flocked
to them from all parts of the country, deserting home and
hearth. A sort of religious mania, which the contemporary
writers ascribed to a peculiar collocation of the stars, seized
on the people of Bohemia. It is, on the other hand, more
than probable that Zizka of Trocnov, Nicholas of Hus, and
the other leaders, who were already certain that they would
shortly have to resist the armed forces of Sigismund, viewed
with favour these meetings, which kept their men in touch
with each other, and prevented their dispersing.

At a meeting held near Prague on the day of St. Venceslas
(September 28), the Taborites decided to hold their next
assembly in Prague itself, and fixed its date for November 10.
Though the great mass of the enthusiasts this time also
spent the days in prayers and devotion, there is little
doubt that the leaders held a serious consultation, and on
that day decided to obtain possession of Prague.

Queen Sophia was probably informed of their intentions.
She obtained aid from several of the utraquist lords, and
also assembled a large body of German mercenaries.
Doubtless, in consequence of the arrival of these mer-
cenaries, the people of Prague rose up in arms (October 25)
and obtained possession of the old castle on the Vyse-
hrad, the most ancient seat of the Bohemian sovereigns,
possibly with the connivance of the soldiers of the former
bodyguard of King Venceslas, who were quartered there.
Meanwhile, some days before November 10, armed bands
of Taborites began to arrive in Prague from every direction.
The citizens of Prague, encouraged by their first success
and by the arrival of the Taborites, now led by Zizka and
Nicholas of Hus, began further hostilities against the troops
of Queen Sophia. They attacked the quarter known as the
" Mala Strana," near which the royal palace of the Hradcany
is situated. The attacking party were received with dis-
charges of artillery, then still a great novelty in Bohemia,
and very bloody street-fighting ensued (November 4, 141 9).
" It was a night of fear and terror, sorrow and lamentation,

I20 Bohemia

only to be compared to the day of the last judgment."^
The citizens of Prague were, on the whole, successful, but
they failed to obtain possession of the royal castle of the
Hradcany, from which, when it was first attacked. Queen
Sophia had fled. The situation of the town, however,
remained a perilous one. Cenek of Wartenberg, who in
the absence of Queen Sophia had assumed the entire
government of the country, requested and received aid from
numerous knights and nobles, and the German towns of
Bohemia also sent large forces to his aid.

A large part of the " small quarter " of Prague, and many
buildings in other parts of the town, had been burnt down,
and the citizens were anxious to obtain at least temporary
tranquillity. An armistice was therefore concluded (Novem-
ber 13, 141 9) without much difficulty. The utraquist
nobles promised to unite with the Praguers in defending the
right of communion in both kinds, while the Praguers again
gave up the castle of Vysehrad to Queen Sophia. Zizka,
who disapproved even of this temporary compromise, left
Prague with his followers and marched to Pilsen, where at
that time a considerable part of the population was in favour
of the Taborite cause.

On hearing of the disturbances in Bohemia King Sigis-
mund, who was then in Hungary, abandoned his intended
campaign against the Turks, and hastened to Moravia.
Shortly after his arrival at Brno (December 141 9) Queen
Sophia met him there, together with many nobles — both of
the utraquist and of the Romanist party — and envoys of the
town of Prague. King Sigismund again gave evasive
answers to the many questions as to his religious policy
which were addressed to him. He declared that he re-
served his decision till he should have arrived at Prague.
He requested the lords of the utraquist party to refrain
meanwhile from all attempts to coerce those of their depend-
ents who were of the Romanist party. He also requested
the envoys of the town of Prague to cause all the street
fortifications which had been erected there during the
recent disturbances to be removed. Queen Sophia now
resigned the functions of regent, which she had only
exercised during the last few troublous months, and King
Sigismund, for the present, entrusted Cenek of Wartenberg
with the government of Bohemia.

1 Palacky, quoting from a contemporary writer.

An Historical Sketch 121

King Sigismund did not, as had been expected, im-
mediately repair to Prague, where he should have been
crowned as king, according to the institutions of the
country, but travelled to Silesia (about January 1420).
There is little doubt that he did not wish to enter Bohemia
before he had collected sufficient forces to become absolute
master of the land, and thus be able to rule it according to
the Pope's desire, suppressing all opinions and practices
contrary to the doctrines of Rome.

Quiet returned to Prague for the moment. The fortifica-
tions and barricades were removed, and many Germans and
other adherents of Rome returned to the city. That party,
relying on the support of Sigismund, now assumed a more
aggressive attitude, and began to persecute its opponents.
In several towns the utraquists were attacked, but the
miners of Kutna Hora, mostly Germans and fanatical
adherents of Rome, surpassed all others in cruelty. They
seized all utraquists in and near the town, and threw them
alive into one of the deepest shafts of the silver mines, which
in mockery they called Tabor. We are told that theii
leaders had at first caused the utraquists to be decapitated,
but that the executioners refused to continue their work, so
numerous were those who were condemned to death. In
the course of a few months about 1600 prisoners were
thrown into the pit of Kutna Hora.

Meanwhile Zizka, who had disapproved of the truce which
the Praguers had concluded with King Sigismund, had
marched to Plzefi,^ which town he seems at first to have
intended to make the stronghold of his party. In the
southern parts of Bohemia some of Zizka's adherents, led
by a bell-founder named Hromadka, had surprised and
stormed the small town of Austi (February 21, 1420). Not
finding the situation of the town sufficiently strong, they
removed to a position about an hour from Austi, where a
castle named Hradiste was situated in a very commanding
position. They immediately began to fortify the land round
this castle, and a town quickly sprung up to which they gave
the biblical name of Tabor. Hromadka informed Zizka of
this, asking him to send aid to Tabor, as he expected
shortly to be attacked, ^izka willingly consented, perhaps
already intending to make the new town the stronghold of
his party. Plis position at Pilsen had become critical ; he
1 In German "Pilsen."
E 2

122 Bohemia

was besieged by a large army of the adherents of King
Sigismund, while the Romanist inhabitants of the town
were strongly hostile, and even his own soldiers were losing
confidence. Zizka was therefore glad to be able to come to
terms with Venceslas of Duba, the commander of the
besieging forces. A treaty was concluded through^ the
intervention of the citizens of Prague, by which Zizka
surrendered Pilsen on condition that the right of receiving
the communion in both kinds should be retained in the
town, and that he and his followers should be allowed to
march to Tabor without hindrance. The Roman Catholic
inhabitants alone remained in the town, and Pilsen hence-
forth became the great stronghold of the papal party in
Bohemia.

Zizka set out for Tabor with only four hundred warriors,
twelve equipped wagons, and nine horsemen. A large
number of women and children accompanied the expedi-
tion. On their way they were attacked, near the village of
Sudomef, by Catholic bands who were marching to risinforce
the army before Pilsen, and who did not consider them-
selves bound by the truce concluded with Zizka. The
enemies consisted of two thousand horsemen, all wearing
heavy armour, and who were consequently known as the
"iron men." Zizka, as soon as he saw that there was no
hope of evading the unequal combat, drew up his little
army near one of the fish-ponds that are very numerous in
that part of Bohemia, in a position in which one of his
flanks was protected by a steep dyke. The war-chariots
were drawn up in a line that faced the foe, and the enemy
were obliged to dismount to attack Zizka's position. He is
said to have ordered the Taborite women to spread out
their long veils on the ground, hoping that the heavy spurs
of the enemy's dismounted horsemen would catch in them.
The Taborites defended themselves with desperate courage,
and though a few were made prisoners, they succeeded in
beating off the attacking forces. The skirmish, which was
very bloody, lasted till sunset, when the Catholics retired.
Darkness set in earlier than usual at that time of the year,
and the pious Taborites thought that God had ordained
this for their protection. The skirmish at Sudomef (March
25, J420) was the first fight in the open field during the
Hussite wars, and it established Zizka's reputation as a
leader, ^izka and his band encamped on the battle-field

An Historical Sketch 123

in sign of victory, and continued their march next day with-
out further attack. When they arrived near Tabor they
were met by a large number of "brethren" who were
marching to their aid, and these conducted ^izka into the
new stronghold with great honours and rejoicings.^

Tabor now became the stronghold and centre of all those
who most energetically opposed the government of King
Sigismund. Townsmen, peasants, and even nobles from all
parts of Bohemia flocked to the new town, in which no
differences of rank were recognized, and, following the
example of the primitive Christians, all were " brothers and
sisters." All the advanced opponents of Rome among the
clergy also assembled at Tabor, where, besides establishing
communion in both kinds, they organized religious services
which in many ways differed from the customs of the
Church of Rome. All vestments were prohibited, the
priests officiating in ordinary clothes. The use of Latin in
Church services was alsp abolished, and was replaced by the
Bohemian language.

The accounts we possess as to the internal constitution of
the community of Tabor are unfortunately both insufficient
and contradictory. The organization was undoubtedly a
military one, and almost immediately after Zizka's arrival
at Tabor four captains (" heytmane " in Bohemian) were
chosen, of whom he, of course, was one. We also find the
name of Nicholas of Hus among the first captains of the
Taborites. Besides the military leaders, the most pro-
minent and popular among the clergy exercised a great,
though ill-defined, influence over the community of Tabor.

Zizka, immediately after his arrival at Tabor, undertook
a thorough military organization of his followers, most of
whom had no previous military training, and were merely
religious enthusiasts. From among them he soon formed
an almost invincible army. Several small but invariably
successful raids against the neighbouring lords of the
Catholic party soon gave them greater self-confidence.

Zizka had indeed no time to lose if he hoped successfully

^ I am principally indebted for these notes on the foundation of
Tabor and the skirmish of Sudomer to Professor Tomek's Life of Zizka,
the most graphic and accuiate account of the campaigns of the great
Hussite leader. I much regret that want of space will not allow me to
borrow more largely from this interesting work, written in what is in
Western Europe practically an "unknown tongue."

124 Bohemia

to resist the onslaught of King Sigismund. In accordance
with the king, Pope Martin V had, on March i, 1420,
proclaimed a crusade against Bohemia, calling the whole
Christian world to arms against that nation, and promising
the usual indulgences. A great number of German princes
joined Sigismund at Breslau to concert as to the coming
campaign, and volunteers from almost every country of
Europe rallied round the standard of the cross.

When the news of the intended crusade reached Bohemia
indignation was general. For a time even the most
moderate utraquists were prepared to resist the attacks of
King Sigismund. The terms of crusade, which, it was said,
should only have been employed in warfare against pagans
or Mahomedans, and which stigmatized the whole country
as heretical, incensed every Bohemian against Sigismund,
to whose influence the decree was attributed. The highest
official of the land, Cenek of Wartenberg, had been present
at the deliberations of Breslau, but now thoroughly aware
of the feelings of the court of Sigismund, he decided "as
a Bohemian and a Hussite" to throw in his cause with
that of his country. He concluded an alliance with the
Praguers, and issued a proclamation to the country in the
name of the whole utraquist nobility. This document
warned all Bohemians and Moravians against obeying any
orders of Sigismund, King of Germany and Hungary, who
was the enemy of the Bohemian nation, and who had not
been crowned king (of Bohemia).

The consequences of this proclamation probably went far
beyond the expectations of Wartenberg. The whole people
of Bohemia rose in arms, and in many places vented their
rage on the papal clergy. Large numbers of churches and
convents in all parts of Bohemia were plundered and burnt,
and in retribution of the cruelties of the Catholics at Kutna
Hora and elsewhere, several Catholic priests and monks
suffered the same death as Hus.

Sigismund, whose allies were slowly moving onward from
all countries, had meanwhile entered Bohemia from Silesia,
and captured the town of Kralove Hradec without much
resistance. From there he marched to Kutna Hora, where
the German inhabitants had already proved themselves
zealous adherents of the papal cause.

The cruelties practised on Catholic priests, and the
barbarous destruction of churches and convents, which'

An Historical Sketch 125

contained most of the finest art treasures of Bohemia,
caused great displeasure to the more moderate opponents
of the papal cause. When Sigismund, therefore, sent
envoys to Prague to treat for a truce in view of a pacifica-
tion of the country, he found a willing hearing with Cenek
of Wartenberg. Cenek, deserting the party he had so
recently joined, concluded a private, and at first secret,
treaty with the king. On the conditions of an amnesty for
himself and for his children, and the guarantee of freedom
to all the tenants on his estates to continue to receive com-
munion in both kinds, he abandoned the cause of the
Praguers, and even admitted the king's troops into the
royal castle on the Hradcany. The first result of this step
was a renewal of the street-fighting at Prague, as the citizens
attempted to storm the castle, but were repulsed by the
troops of Cenek. An attack the Praguers made on the
Vysehrad castle was also repulsed by the garrison which
held it for King Sigismund. During these repeated struggles
in the streets a large part of the " small quarter " (Mala
Strana) of Prague, and of that part of the " new town "
which lies at the foot of the Vysehrad were burnt.

These events inspired the citizens with a desire for peace,
and they decided to send envoys to Sigismund. The king,
who was then at Kutna Hora in the midst of a population
entirely devoted to the papal cause, not improbably,
judging the general feeling by his immediate surroundings,
over-rated the strength of that party. He received the
deputies of Prague very haughtily, and again ordered them
to remove all the street barricades, and to deliver up all
their arms to his troops in the castles of Hraddany and
Vysehrad. It was only after every show of resistance had
ceased that the king was prepared to let the citizens know
what degree of mercy would be shown them.

This demand of unconditional surrender could not even
be considered by the envoys of Prague, who were indeed
among the most moderate adherents of the utraquist party,
but who had at home to fear the opposition of a large part
of the townsmen, headed by many of the priests, and these
had from the first declared all hopes of an agreement with
Sigismund to be futile. War to death became t;he watch-
word, and the Praguers applied for aid to all the nobles and
towns who had not already submitted to Sigismund. Their
most important decision, however, was to sink all difference

126 Bohemia

of opinion in view of the common enemy, and to seek for
help from Tabor. Messengers were sent from Prague to
Tabor entreating the Taborites, " if they wished verily to
obey the law of God, to march to their aid without delay,
and with the largest force they could muster."

At Tabor, thanks to Zizka's foresight, every one was
ready. Probably on the very day the message arrived,
9000 warriors, accompanied by a large number of priests,
women, and children, set forth and soon arrived at Prague
after they had defeated some of the royal troops, who, at
Poric on the River Sazava, had attempted to intercept
their passage. Almost at the same time a thousand horse-
men, led by the utraquist knights BradatJ^ and Obrovec, also
came to aid in the defence of the menaced capital.

Sigismund had at first intended to march immediately
from Kuttenberg to Prague, where the castles of Hradcany
and Vy^ehrad were still in the hands of his adherents.
Probably informed of the strength of the forces now
assembling in the town, he changed his intentions and
decided to await the arrival of the whole force of the
crusaders. By the end of June (1420) most of them had
arrived in Bohemia. They were led by the Elector Palatine,
the Archbishop-Electors of Maintz, Trier, and Cologne,
Frederick of Hohenzollern (who had just become Elector of
Brandenburg, which Sigismund had mortgaged to him),
Duke Albert of Austria, Sigismund's son-in-law, and other
German princes. The crusaders comprised men of almost
every country in Europe,^ and their number is estimated
between 100,000 and 150,000. If we believe Aenaeas
Sylvius, the horsemen alone were 70,000 in number; in
that case the higher figure probably more exactly indicates
the full strength of the crusading army.

On June 30, 1420, Sigismund entered the castle of
Prague, on the Hradcany, and the enormous forces of the
crusaders encamped round the town. Zizka had before
their arrival occupied and fortified the steep hill to the east

1 The contemporary chronicler, Lawrence of Brezova, not without
pride names among those who then attacked his country : Bohemians
(of course Romanists), Moravians, Hungarians and Croatians, Dalmatians
and Bulgarians, Wailachians and Sicilians, Cini(j-zV) and Jasi(j2V) Slavon-
ians, Servians, Ruthenians, Styrians, menof Meisens, Bavarians, Saxons,
Austrians, Franks, Frenchmen, Englishmen, men of Brabant, Westpha-
lians, Dutchmen, Switzers, Lusatians, Saabians, Carinthians, men of
Aragon, Spaniards, Poles, Germans from the Rhine, and many others.

!

An Historical Sketch 127

of Prague, then known as the Vitkov, but which since those
times, and up to the present day, bears the name of Zizka's
Hill. The invaders did not immediately begin their attack,
and it was only on July 14 that Sigismund made a deter-
mined attempt on Prague. The attack was made in three
directions : from the castles on the Hradcany and on the
Vysehrad, the districts of the town nearest to those castles —
the Mala Strana and the Nove Mesto — were attacked, while a
third attack was made on the Vitkov hill, the key of the
position of the defenders, who depended on its possession
for maintaining their communications with the country.
This hill was defended by Zizka and his Taborites, who
resisted the attack of the Germans ^ with desperate courage.
Even the Taborite women assisted in the defence of the
very primitive fortifications Zizka had hastily erected. When
the Taborites were for a time driven back, one of these
women refused to retreat, saying that a true Christian
should never give way to Antichrist, whereupon she was
immediately killed by the Germans. The bravery of Zizka,
who himself fought in the front rank, at last drove the
Germans down the hill. Great numbers of them were
killed or driven into the river Vltava by the Bohemians who
pursued them.

Zizka did not himself think that his victory would prove
decisive, for he immediately began to strengthen the fortifi-
cations which had hurriedly been erected on the spot
formerly known as the Vitkov, but which since that great
victory has been called Zizka's Hill.

Fortunately for the Bohemians, dissensions had broken
out among their enemies. The Germans strongly distrusted
the Bohemian troops of Sigismund. The utraquist lords in
the king's army, on the other hand, felt some sympathy for
the defenders of Prague, and were indignant against the
Germans, who, thwarted in their attempt on Prague, scoured
all the neighbouring country, burning as heretics all Bohe-
mians, without distinction, whom they could seize.

The utraquist lords, therefore, attempted to mediate
between the king and the citizens of Prague, with whom
they thought an agreement more feasible than with the
fanatical Taborites. The Praguers, however, refused to
enter into separate negotiations. It was therefore decided

^ They were horsemen from Meissen and Thuringia, about 9000 in
number.

128 Bohemia

that an instrument should be drawn up, formulating every
point on which all Bohemians who adhered to the com-
munion in both kinds agreed. Deliberations took place
between the Praguers, the Taborites, and the other defenders
of Prague.

The principal points of the belief of the utraquists of
all shades, the recognition of which they considered an
indispensable preliminary to all negotiations for peace,
were expressed by the theologians of the University of
Prague in four articles. ^

These articles, as Palack)^ says, openly proclaimed
the opinions of the Bohemian nation, and became the
basis of all subsequent attempts of reconciliation between
Bohemia and the Western Church. They became widely
known under the name of the Articles of Prague. The
articles declared —

I. The word of God shall in the Kingdom of Bohemia
be freely and without impediment proclaimed and preached
by Christian priests.

II. The sacrament of the body and blood of God shall
in the two kinds, that is in bread and wine, be freely admini-
stered to all faithful Christians according to the order and
teaching of our Saviour.

III. The priests and monks, according to secular law,
possess great worldly wealth in opposition to the teaching
of Christ. Of this wealth they shall be deprived.

IV. All mortal sins, particularly those that are public, as
well as all disorders opposed to God's law, shall in all
classes be suppressed by those whose office it is to do so.
All evil and untruthful rumours ^ shall be suppressed
for the good of the commonwealth, the kingdom, and the
nation.

These articles were undeniably in accord with the wants
of the age and formed the basis of a possible agreement.
The utraquist nobles who, though they were on the king's
side, yet warmly approved of the four articles, unsuccessfully
attempted to obtain their acceptance by the papal legate.

^ It is probable that deliberation on this subject took place some
time before, and that a draft of the articles had been made as early as
in 1417 (see my Life and Times of Master John Hus, pp. 343-344).

2 ^This principally referred to the statement frequently made by the
Germans that Bohemia was a heretical country.

An Historical Sketch 129

The dissensions in Sigismund's camp became intensified
by the failure of the negotiations. Open warfare between
the so-called allies seemed more than probable. Sigismund
therefore decided to abandon the siege of Prague, and to
dismiss his German allies, whose arrival — in consequence
of the old hatred between the two races — had had as
principal result the diminution of the already scanty number
of the king's adherents in Bohemia. Before leaving Prague,
Sigismund caused himself to be crowned King of Bohemia
in the cathedral of St. Vitus.^ The ceremony of the
coronation of their kings has, with the Bohemians, as with
the Hungarians, always been surrounded by a peculiar
sanctity ; by submitting to it, Sigismund hoped to strengthen
his claim to the Bohemian throne. It was, however, noticed
that neither representatives of the towns of Prague nor the
holders of many of the great offices of state were present.

On August 2, 1420, the king left the neighbourhood of
Prague and retired to Kuttenberg. The crusaders dis-
persed to their various countries.

CHAPTER VI

FROM THE CORONATION OF KING SIGISMUND TO THE DEATH
OF KING LOUIS AT MOHA^ (142O-1526)

The skirmish at Sudomer and the battle at Zizka's Hill
mark the beginning, of the Hussite wars.

The period from the battle on Zizka's Hill (1420) to that
fat Lipany (1434), which decided the fate of the Taborite
I party, is the most eventful one in Bohemian history. The
renewed crusades against Bohemia ; incessant local warfare
between the utraquist nobles and townsfolk, and those who
were on the side of Rome ; occasional warfare among the
utraquists themselves, when the Taborites and Praguers fell
out with each other ; the rise and fall of Tabor ; the tem-
porary hegemony of the city of Prague over a large part of
Bohemia ; the attempt to re-establish monarchy under a
Polish dynasty, are only some of the events and movements
crowded into these few years. The intellectual activity of
the people (manifested where, under the given conditions,
it could alone manifest itself, namely in the field of theolo-

1 The cathedral is situated close to the castle on the Hradcin, which
was held by the royal forces.

130 Bohemia

gical controversy) was also unparalleled in the history of the
country. The theological disputations between the papal,
the Calixtine, and the Taborite ecclesiastics were con-
stantly renewed, and, as was inevitable in a country so
thoroughly absorbed in religious controversy, fanatical and
grotesque doctrines often came to the surface. We read
of preachers who asserted that the millennium had already
begun, and of the Adamite enthusiasts, whom Zizka almost^
immediately suppressed, and whose importance has been
most unduly exaggerated by Aenaeas Sylvius and other
adherents of the papal cause. It is much to be regretted
that — as Palack)^, the great Bohemian historian, tells us —
contemporary records for these years are scarcer than almost
for any other period.

King Sigismund left Prague in a state of the most violent
irritation against the Bohemian nation. He attempted to
organize the adherents of Rome by appointing certain of
the most prominent nobles who belonged to that party
leaders or commanders of each district of the country, in-
structing them to maintain peace and extirpate heresy.

This measure, which, as the greatest part of the land
was in arms against the king, was of little practical im-
portance, only tended to increase the animosity of the
Bohemians against Sigismund. The Praguers, even before
the king had raised the siege of their town, had decreed
very severe measures against the priests and Germans who
had left the city before the siege. All their property was
confiscated for the benefit of the town. The once very
strong German element in Prague was for the time com-
pletely annihilated. Dissensions had at this moment
already broken out between the citizens of Prague and
their Taborite allies, whose fanaticism in destroying churches
and convents caused great exasperation. Zizka and his
followers therefore left Prague and marched to Southern
Bohemia, where in a campaign, for which want of space
makes any lengthier mention impossible, they defeated
several of the papal lords who still maintained the cause of
King Sigismund. The Praguers, meanwhile, continued the
siege of the Vysehrad, the occupation of which by King
Sigismund's troops was a permanent menace to their town.
Sigismund, hearing that the garrison was sorely pressed,
marched to its relief with an army of 20,000 .men, the
greater part of whom were Hungarians. Many of the

An Historical Sketch 131

utraquist lords, exasperated by Sigismund's decision to
employ German and Hungarian soldiers against his
Bohemian subjects, now joined the national cause, and one
of them, Hynek Krusina, Lord of Lichtenburg, became the
commander of the Bohemian forces.

A very sanguinary encounter took place in the valley
which is situated at the foot of the Vysehrad on All Saints'
Day (November i, 1420). Several lords, seeing that the
men of Prague were well entrenched, advised the king not
to disturb them, as his troops might suffer severe losses, but
the king said : *' I must fight with these peasants to-day."
The Praguers at first wavered, when Lord Hynek called
out with a loud voice : " Dear brethren, do not turn back,
but be to-day brave knights in Christ's battle ; for it is God's,
not our fight, we are fighting to-day. Be certain that the
Almighty God will deliver all His and your enemies into
your hands to-day." Before he had finished his speech the
cry arose : " The enemy is flying." ^

King Sigismund's troops were decisively defeated, and
the losses, particularly among the Bohemian and Moravian
warriors, who still sided with him were very great. The king
was said to have exposed them more than his other troops.

The patriots deeply mourned the fate of their country-
men. Though they had adhered to the feudal system
which had obliged them to war for their liege-lord King
Sigismund, the dead men had belonged to the national
utraquist Church, and those who had not immediately suc-
cumbed to their wounds had, before dying, received com-
munion in the two kinds. The contemporary chronicler
Laurence of Bfezova thus describes the mournful aspect of
the battle-field : " What man, who was not more cruel than
a pagan, could pass through these fields and vineyards and
view the brave bodies of the dead without compassion?
What Bohemian, unless he were a madman, could see these
dainty and robust warriors, these men so curly-haired and
so comely without deeply bewailing their fate ? " The castle
of the Vysehrad surrendered to the Praguers immediately
after the battle.

The intense animosity caused by the policy of King

Sigismund had led a considerable party in Bohemia to plan

his deposition, and to meditate on the choice of another

sovereign. Those among the utraquist nobihty who had

^ Palacky, quoting a contemporary chronicler.

132 Bohemia

abandoned all hope of securing from Sigismund toleration
for their faith, as well as the men of Prague, favoured this
project, which, on the other hand — probably through the
influence of Nicholas of Hus — was opposed by most of the
Taborites. Zizka, however, in this matter disagreed with
the larger number of his party. It was decided to offer the
Bohemian crown to Vladislav, King of Poland, under the
sole condition of his accepting the Articles of Prague, and
promising to defend them. This declaration was signed by
many of the utraquist nobles, the magistrates of the town
of Prague, and of those towns that accepted its direction,
and by Zizka alone on the part of the Taborites. Nicholas
of Hus, who most violently opposed the choice of a foreign
king, died by a fall from his horse towards the end of the
year (1420).

Though he had been one of the earliest leaders of the
party of reform, there is no doubt that the death of
Nicholas of Hus at this moment was advantageous to his
cause, for it made Zizka uncontested leader of the more
advanced or Taborite party ; and as he was then inclined to
act in agreement with the Praguers and the utraquist nobles,
it prevented, at least for the moment, a split among the
Bohemians opposed to Rome.

In the early part of the year 142 1, Zizka's troops and
the Praguers completely subdued Western Bohemia, where
Sigismund's authority entirely ceased. Even the city
of Pilsen concluded a truce, during which the citizens were
obliged to tolerate worship according to the Articles of
Prague in their town and its territory. The united utraquist
forces now attacked Kutna Hora, which was still in the hands
of the adherents of Sigismund, though the king had left
Bohemia early in the year (February 142 1). This town
was more odious to the utraquists than any other, because
of the cruelties its inhabitants had committed. The citizens
were soon obliged to surrender and to do public penance,
but the utraquists sought no further revenge, an almost
unique occurrence on the part of either of the opponents
during the Hussite wars. After the fall of Kutna Hora
many other towns and castles surrendered, and many of the
utraquist nobles, abandoning Sigismund, joined what had by
this time become the national cause throughout the land.
Apiong these nobles was Cenek of Wartenberg, who now
again renounced the allegiance of King Sigismund.

An Historical Sketch 133

It was still a greater blow to the papal party that about
this time the Archbishop of Prague, Conrad of Vechta, " to
the surprise and horror of all Christendom," solemnly an-
nounced his acceptation of the Articles of Prague (142 1).
On the other hand, the strength of the utraquist party was
weakened by the attitude of the Taborites, whose distrust of
the more moderate reformers was increased by the fact that
that party had now been joined by the most eminent prelates
of the Church of Rome. The University of Prague attempted
to mediate between the different factions of the reform party,
and numerous disputations between the rival divines took
place, in which even the minutest questions of dogma and
ritual were discussed with the utmost thoroughness and
obstinacy.

Having subdued nearly all Bohemia, the utraquists were
preparing to invade Moravia, when envoys from that country,
in which utraquism had many adherents, arrived and sued
for peace. It was agreed that the Estates of both countries
should assemble at Caslav. This Diet began its session on
June i,^ 142 1, and included the Archbishop of Prague, the
Lords Cenek of Wartenberg, Krusina of Lichtenburg, Vic-
torin of Podebrad (father of the future King George), the
supreme magistrates of Prague, John Zizka and other leaders
of Tabor, as well as representatives of the papal party. The
contemporary records of the assembly at Caslav are both
vague and contradictory. It seems, however, certain that the
Articles of Prague were almost unanimously confirmed, and
that King Sigismund was declared to be deposed, though not
without some opposition, especially on the part of the
Moravian nobles. It was further decided that, pending the
negotiations with Poland — though this reason was not
specially stated — twenty regents should be elected. Of
these, five were to be chosen from among the nobles, four
from the citizens of Prague, two from the community of
Tabor, five from among the knighthood, and two from the
other Bohemian towns (/. e. with the exceptions of Prague
and Tabor). This scheme undoubtedly organized a coali-
tion government — to use a modern phrase — on the broadest
base, and even this attempt at compromise is a proof of the
comparative political maturity of the Bohemians of that
period. Among the new regents we find Ulrich of Rosen-
berg, head of the papal lords, Cenek of Wartenberg,
Krusina of Lichtenburg, and John Zizka.

134 Bohemia

About this time the castle of Prague on the Hrad^any
Hill surrendered. Sigismund's influence disappeared in
Prague ; but Bohemia was still menaced both by internal
disturbances and by foreign foes. New religious troubles
broke out in Prague, caused by the fanatical monk John of
Zelivo, and at Tabor public order was disturbed by the
violence of fanatics.

Zizka soon quelled these disturbances in the barbarous
fashion common to all religious parties at that period. He
caused about fifty enthusiasts, men and women, to be burnt
for denying the real presence of Christ in the sacrament of
the altar. They met their fate bravely. " Gaily laughing,
they walked into the flames, boasting that they would
that very day take their meal with Christ in heaven."^

Zizka's commanding influence at Tabor restored order in
the town, and he was soon free to continue the war against
the adherents of the papal cause who still held isolated
castles in many parts of Bohemia. In besieging one of
these castles, Rabi, which belonged to the Romanist Lord
of Riesenburg, Zizka was severely wounded in the eye by
an arrow. His life was for some time in danger, and
though the doctors of Prague, to which town he was
i immediately carried, succeeded in saving his life, he now
I became totally blind.

Local warfare between the Germans and Bohemians had,
meanwhile, continued uninterruptedly both on the Saxon
and on the Silesian frontiers, but a more serious danger
now menaced Bohemia. As early as the month of April
(142 1) the German princes decided to undertake a new
crusade against Bohemia, and Sigismund, though detained
in Hungary by the hostile attitude of Turkey and Venice,

^ Palack;^. Some of these fanatics escaped from Tabor before Zizka
had returned there from Caslav, and settled in an island in the little
river Nezarka. Here they formed a separate community under the
leadership of a peasant named Nicolas, whom they called Adam.
According to the not very reliable report of Aenaeas '^yWwxs, {Hu lor ia
Boheinica, chap, xli), this leader " filium Dei se dixit et Adam vocari."
Aenaeas further tells us *' connubia eis promiscua faere, nefas tamen
injussu Adami mulierem cognoscere. Sed ut quis libidine incensus in
aliquam exarsit eam manu prehendit et adiens principem * in hanc '
inquit, 'spiritus meus concaluit. ' Cui princeps respondit, *ite crescite
et nnultiplicamini et replete terram.' " These fanatics were exterminated
by Zizka after a few months (Oct. 142 1). This quite isolated occurrence
has from the first been greatly magnified and exaggerated by writers
hostile to the Hussite movement.

An Historical Sketch 135

approved of their plans, and promised his aid. To give
Sigismund time to return to Bohemia, it was decided that
the crusaders should assemble on the feast of St. Bartholo-
mew (August 24).

Of the second crusade against Bohemia scanty and in-
sufficient record has come down to us. Five of the German
Electors took part in the campaign, and the whole invading
force, according to the most trustworthy sources, numbered
200,000 men. Numerous volunteers from all parts of
Germany flocked to the standard of the Cross, and were
rewarded by the cardinal legate Branda with absolutions
and indulgences. It had been decided that the Germans
should enter Bohemia from the west, by Cheb ^ whilst Sigis-
mund and his son-in-law Albert, Duke of Austria, would
invade the country from the east. The town of Kutna
Hora in Eastern Bohemia still numbered many adherents
of the papal cause, who were, therefore, also friendly to the
cause of Sigismund.

The Germans marched through Western Bohemia burning
the villages and murdering the inhabitants "more cruelly
than heathens would have done." They began the siege of
the town of i^atec,^ and on September 17, 1421, made an
attempt to storm it, but they were beaten back by the bravery
of the Bohemian garrison of only 6000 men. The news
that the army of the Praguers ^ was approaching, and disgust
at Sigismund's failure to fulfil his promise of creating a
diversion in Eastern Bohemia, caused the Germans to
retreat precipitately and ingloriously.

Fortune here again favoured the Bohemians. Sigismund
had but just completed his armaments when the last German
soldiers left the soil of Bohemia. His troops and those of
his son-in-law entered Moravia early in October. The
supreme command of the army, which consisted of about
23,000 men, was entrusted to the Italian condottiere Pipa
of Ozora. Moravia was soon subdued, and the easy con-
quest of the sister-land was not without its effect on
Bohemia. Many of the Bohemian lords, whom the excesses
of fanatics, both at Prague and at Tabor, had alienated from

1 In German, "Eger." ^ ^ 2 j^ German, "Saaz."

^ It is uncertain whether Zizka and his Taborites took part in this
expedition, though there is evidence that the men of Prague appealed
to him for aid. Zizka himself can at that time hardly have recovered
from his wound.

136

Bohemia

the national cause, resumed allegiance to King Sigismund.
Among them was Cenek of Wartenberg, whose political
manoeuvres we may consider typical of the vacillating policy
of the great utraquist nobles of his time.

Soon after entering Bohemia, Sigismund obtained posses-
sion of the town of Kutna Hora, by the aid of a powerful
party among the townsmen who upheld the papal cause, or
at any rate were opposed to the hegemony which Prague at
this period attempted to impose on the Bohemian towns.
Zizka, who with his Taborites had now joined his forces
with those of Prague, retreated before the invaders as far as
Kolin, and Emperor Sigismund spent Christmas at Kutna
Hora, feeling certain that he had now at last subdued the
Bohemians.

Zizka had meanwhile received reinforcements from various
parts of Bohemia, and his soldiers, exasperated by the
atrocities which the Hungarian soldiers of Sigismund had
committed, were even more anxious than usual to encounter
the foe. On the other hand, Pipa strongly advised the king
to retreat. When Zizka's army, on the " day of the three
kings" (or Epiphany) (January 6, 1422), suddenly attacked
the village of Nebovid — between Kolin and Kutna Hora —
a panic seized the king's forces. An immediate retreat
became necessary, and though Sigismund is said to have
urged some of the Bohemian nobles who were now on his
side to attempt to hold the town of Kutna Hora, they
"refused to encounter certain death." The retreat soon
became a rout, and nearly 12,000 of Sigisrnund's soldiers
were killed, the king only escaping by his rapid flight. The
town of Nemeck)^ Brod,^ where a last stand was made, was
stormed by the Bohemians on January 10, 1422. Contrary
to Zizka's orders 2 its defenders were put to the sword, while
the town was pillaged and totally destroyed.

This great victory of the Bohemians for the time ensured
to them safety from foreign enemies, and it also precipitated
the result of the negotiations with Poland. King Vladislav
had declined the Bohemian crown, but his brother Alexander
Witold, Prince of Lithuania, was now ready to accept

1 In German, Deutsch Brod.

^ As a proof of this, Palacky quotes an autograph letter of Zizka
preserved in the Bohemian Museum at Prague, in which he, later in the
year, ordered his soldiers to assemble at N^mecky Brod, ** that they
might repent where they had sinned."

An Historical Sketch 137

it, as it had been repeatedly offered to him by Bohemian
deputations.

Witold assumed the title of " acknowledged " or " de-
manded " ^ King of Bohemia, and with his aid and consent
his nephew Sigismund Korybut 2" equipped an armed force
of about 5000 men to maintain Witold's claim to the
Bohemian throne. This enterprise caused great excitement
among the Slav populations of Eastern Europe. " The
Poles at that time most sympathized with Bohemia, and
desired a union between the two countries ; still greater
enthusiasm was shown by the Ruthenian population of the
districts near Lemberg, who, belonging to the Greek Church
were themselves utraquists." ^

Korybut first marched into Moravia, from which country
King Sigismund retired on the news of the arrival of the
Polish prince. Korybut then entered Bohemia, and
on his arrival at Caslav was enthusiastically received by
many of the utraquist nobles. He soon afterwards (May 16,
1422) arrived at Prague and assumed the government of
Bohemia, as far as the almost anarchical condition of the
land rendered any government possible.

Ever since the battle of Nebovid and King Sigismund's
retreat into Hungary (which had temporarily secured
Bohemia from foreign invasion), the town of Prague had
been convulsed by continuous struggles, nominally caused
by differences of opinion among the priesthood with regard
to questions, often very trifling ones, of doctrine or ritual.
The passionate interest in these matters, and still more the
thorough comprehension of them which the Bohemians of
that age showed, can only be compared to the condition of
the population of Constantinople during the continuance of
the Eastern Empire. Still, these questions gradually tended
to become only the pretence for struggles of which the
inevitable opposition between aristocracy and democracy
was the real cause. As was natural, the more aristocratic
party at Prague relied on the support of the utraquist nobles,

^ The German term is "Postulirter Konig von Bohmen"; according
to the old Bohemian traditions it was only the coronation that fully
conferred the title of King of Bohemia.

^ This prince, to distinguish him from Eang Sigismund, is generally
known by his father's name as Korybut, or as Korybutovic, i. e. son of
Korybut. Following Palacky, I have adopted the former and shorter
denomination.

3 Palacky.

138

Bohemia

always the most moderate element in the reform party ; the
democrats of Prague, on the other hand, found their natural
allies in the democratic community of Tabor.

Korybut, whose principal supporters were the utraquist
nobles, used his influence in favour of the aristocratic party
at Prague, which through him obtained the important muni-
cipal offices of the city. He endeavoured, and not without
success, to avoid a rupture with Zizka^ and the more
moderate Taborites, whose leader (contrary to the popular
opinion, which represents him as an extreme fanatic) Zizka
was.

As soon as order had been re-established in Prague,
Korybut set out to besiege the castle of Karlstein, which
was still held by the forces of King Sigismund, and which
through its vicinity to Prague was a permanent menace to
that town. This siege was unsuccessful, and Korybut, being
obliged to return to Prague because of renewed riots that
had broken out there, concluded a truce with the defenders
of Karlstein. The duration of this truce, which Korybut
concluded in his own name and in those of the utraquist
lords, was fixed at one year.

King Sigismund had meanwhile endeavoured to detach
the Polish princes from the Bohemian cause. His efforts
were successful, and in consequence of an agreement
with Sigismund, Prince Witold recalled his nephew,
who had been acting as his representative in Bohemia.
Prince Korybut very reluctantly left Prague on December
24, 1422.

The temporary departure of Prince Korybut, whose influ-
ence on the affairs of Bohemia has been greatly under-rated,^
was almost immediately followed by civil war. Probably
from distrust of the utraquist lords, who still held most of

^ In his curious letter to the Praguers, in which he informed them that
he would not oppose Prince Korybut, Zizka says : " We — the Taborites
— will willingly obey his Highness (Prince Korybut), and with the
Lord's help aid him in all rightful things by deed and by advice, and we
beg that you all of you, from this day forth, will verily drop all the
discord, quarrels, and bitterness which you have had either during your
whole life or during these last years, so that you may honestly say the
Lord's Prayer, and pray : * Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them
that trespass against us.'" Palacky very truly remarks that this letter
gives us a clearer idea of the nature of the great Bohemian warrior than
the most elaborate attempt to characterize him could do.

2 This is probably caused by the fact that his conciliatory policy was
equally distasteful to the papal and to the extreme Taborite partisans.

An Historical Sketch 139

the State offices to which Korybut had appointed them,
Zizka rejoined the more advanced Taborite party. It seems
probable that the suspicion that these lords wished to
reinstate Sigismund — whose complicity in the death of Hus
Zizka never forgave — largely influenced the decision of the
leader of the Taborites.

The first armed conflict between the Bohemian parties
took place at Hofic (April 27, 1423), where Cenek of War-
tenberg was decisively defeated by feka. Almost at the
same time the Praguers, and the utraquist lords then allied
with them, began the siege of the castle of Kfizenec, held at
that time by the Taborites.

The fact that a new general armament against the Bohe-
mian heretics was at that moment being prepared in Ger-
many was probably one of the reasons why this siege did
not last long. It was agreed to by both parties that a
disputation between Calixtine and Taborite priests should
take place at the neighbouring castle of Konopist (1423).
No decision was arrived at on the principal question
whether the rites of the Church of Rome which the
Calixtines had retained, and the use of vestments, were
permissible or not. It was, however, decreed that these
questions were only a matter of ecclesiastical regulation,
and in no wise dependent on divine law. A subsequent
disputation (June 24) between the priests remained without
result, but the compromise — such as it was — for a time put
a stop to the internal strife among the Bohemians.

As already mentioned, a new crusade against the Bohe-
mians was decided on early in the year 1423 ; but this
crusade was even more unsuccessful than its predecessors.
The Slavs of Poland, who were to have taken part in it,
were unwilling to go to war with Bohemia, in spite of the
change of policy on the part of their king, Vladislav, and
his brother Witold. The German princes, being engaged
in constant disputes among themselves, only equipped a
scanty force, which soon recrossed the Bohemian frontier,
without having even met the Hussites in the open field.
The King of Denmark, who had arrived in Germany with
an army to wage war against the heretics, also returned to
his own country.

If we can trust the contemporary records (which at this
time are even more obscure than during the other years of
the Hussite wars) the agreement of Konopist was of exceed-

140 Bohemia

ingly short duration. Zizka appears from the first to hava
disapproved of it, and when the Praguers and their allies
entered Moravia (end of July 1423) to aid the utraquists of
that country against their old enemy John "the Iron," now
bishop of Olomonc, the Taborites took no part in the
expedition.

The Bohemian arms were on the whole victorious in
Moravia, but troubles at home soon prevented the patriot
army from pursuing its advantages. The town of Kralove
Hradec had from the first warmly upheld the Calixtine
cause. The governor of the castle, Borek of Miletinck,
who held supreme authority in the city, was leader of the
Bohemian troops then engaged in warfare in Moravia.

During his absence a democratic movement broke out
in the town of Kralove Hradec, and the citizens applied for
aid to i^izka; they asserted that Bofek of Miletinck (who
had been appointed governor by Prince Sigismund Korybut)
no longer had any right to claim lordship over their city,
since the prince who had appointed him had left Bohemia.
Zizka received their request favourably, and consented to
become their leader. This caused an internal conflict more
serious than any that had as yet occurred during the Hussite
wars.

Bofek of Miletinck, with his army of Praguers and utra-
quist lords, abandoned their conquests in Moravia, and
speedily returned to Bohemia to oppose the Taborites. A
sanguinary encounter took place near Kralove Hradec (not
far from the more celebrated battle-field of 1866),^ in which
the Taborites decisively defeated the moderate or Calixtine
party. The contemporary writers mention this battle with
great sorrow, as here " ark was ranged against ark." ^ One
of the prisoners — a priest who had carried the monstrance
before the soldiers of Prague — was brought before Zizka,
who exclaiming, " Thus will I consecrate these priests of the
Praguers," struck him on the head with a club so fiercely
that he died.^

^ The battle of Kralove Hradec, or Koniggratz, is, I think, better
known in England under the name of the battle of Sadova.

2 The utraquist priests of all denominations were at that period in
the habit of carrying the holy sacrament before the troops in the
moment of battle, and it had become habitual to call the monstrance
•* the ark," in conformity with the great predilection for Old Testament
expressions that was so general in 13ohemia at that time.

' Bienenberg, Geschiclite der Stadt Koniggratz.

An Historical Sketch 141

It is probable that the battle of Hralovd Hradec was fol-
lowed by one of those temporary truces so frequent in the
history of Bohemia at this time. At any rate we find ^izka
almost immediately afterwards engaged in warfare in Moravia
and in Hungary, by invading which country, the centre of
Sigismund's power, it was perhaps hoped to induce him to
come to terms, feka's Hungarian campaign was unsuccess-
ful ; but in it, and especially during his retreat, he displayed
higher military ability than on almost any other occasion.

During feka's absence from Bohemia, the Praguers —
still in alliance with the utraquist lords, who loyally but
hopelessly attempted the impossible task of reconciling
King Sigismund to their religious views — again entered into
negotiations with the partisans of the king. At a Diet that
met at Prague (October i6, 1423) it was resolved that repre-
sentatives of the papal and of the utraquist clergy should
meet at Brunn for the purpose of deciding all differences as
to doctrine and ritual in a manner acceptable to all. This
meeting never took place, and the negotiations with King
Sigismund do not appear to have continued. The decision
of Sigismund to award Moravia to his son-in-law Albert of
Austria, whom he at the same time declared heir to the
throne of Bohemia, was probably the cause.

On the other hand, these negotiations with the papal
party exasperated Zizka, who, as'Palackj^ says, now suspected
the whole Calixtine party of insincerity, which he hated
more than " open godlessness," as adherence to the Church
of Rome appeared to him.

Civil war, therefore, broke out in Bohemia from the very
beginning of the year 1424, which, as Palacky says, was
^izka's last and bloodiest year. Fighting between the
Bohemian parties began early in January, as soon as feka
had returned from Hungary; and several skirmishes, in
which he was invariably victorious, took place. Later in the
year he defeated the Praguers and utraquist lords in a very
sanguinary and decisive battle at Malesov.

It is pleasing to think that the great Bohemian warrior at
the moment of his death was again on terms of friendship
with his countrymen. In spite of the strong sympathy for
Bohemia that existed among the Poles, King Vladislav had
definitely sided with the Pope ; but Prince Korybut, contrary
to the king's and Prince Witold's wishes, again bravely
entered the turbulent arena of Bohemian political life. He

142 Bohemia

undoubtedly intended to obtain the Bohemian crown,^ but
the Bohemians only recognized him as provisional governor
of their country.

It seems certain that it was through the mediation of
Prince Korybut that peace between Zizka and the Praguers
was agreed on. Zizka, who was by no means the unreason-
ing fanatic such as former history described him, realized
more clearly than most of his contemporaries the hopeless-
ness of the continued isolated struggle of his people. He
also, and no doubt rightly, thought that it was only from other
Slav countries that his country could hope for efficient aid.
For this reason Zizka always showed himself friendly to the
Polish prince, through whom aid from the people of Poland,
if not from the king, could perhaps be obtained.

On September 14, 1422, a treaty of peace was signed
between Prince Korybut and the Praguers on one side,
Zizka and the Taborites on the other. This treaty was
signed on a spot then known as the "Spitalske Pole"
(hospital field), on the spot where Karlin, the suburb of
Prague, now stands. It was largely due to the eloquence of
the young priest John of Rokycan, who afterwards became
very celebrated as utraquist Archbishop of Prague.

The exact terms of the treaty are not known to us, but
the reconciliation was a complete one, for immediately
afterwards the utraquist lords and Praguers under Korybut,
and the Taborites under Zizka, marched together against
Moravia, then in the power of Sigismund's son-in-law,
Albert of Austria.

Before the allies had reached Moravia, Zizka died of the
plague during the siege of the castle of Pribislav, not far
from the Moravian frontier (October 11, 1424).

Many untruthful and invidious accounts of the death of
the great Bohemian general were circulated by the enemies
of his nation, and have been constantly repeated even by
writers as recent as Carlyle. They may be traced to Aenaeas
Sylvius, who states that Zizka died blaspheming, and ordered
that his body should be flayed, his skin used as a drum, and
his body thrown to the wild beasts. In contrast to these
tales, so obviously in opposition to the nature of Zizka as
recent research has revealed it to us, it may be well to quote

^ Professor Tomek quotes Korybut's declaration of war against King
Sigismund, in which he calls himself "desired and elected King of
Bohemia.

An Historical Sketch 143

the account of a contemporary writer, not improbably an
eye-witness. He writes ^ : " Here at Pfibislav brother 2izka
was seized by a deadly attack of the plague. He gave his
last charge to his faithful Bohemians [saying], that fearing
their beloved God, they should firmly and faithfully defend
God's law in view of His reward in eternity; and then
brother Zizka commended his soul to God, and died on the
Wednesday before the day of St. Gallus." Even had we no
historical evidence to the point, this tranquil death would
appear a fitting end for the great Bohemian patriot. He
who had so often fought what he firmly considered God's
battles, assuredly did not dread entering into God's peace.

The importance of Zizka's position in history can hardly
be exaggerated. As has been already noticed, it was en-
tirely due to him and to his exceptional military genius that
the Hussite movement did not collapse as soon as large
armed forces were moved against Bohemia. Had not the
genius of Zizka contrived to render the Bohemian warriors |
for the time invincible, the name of the Hussites would be
unknown to history, in which Hus would only appear as an
isolated enthusiast like Savonarola. ^ The immediate conse-
quences of the death of Zizka were of great importance to
Bohemia. He was in command of a large army. Had he
lived and freed Moravia, as Bohemia had been, from the
power of Sigismund and Albert, a Diet of the two lands
would have assembled and in all probability have definitely
declared Prince Sigismund Korybut king.

The death of their great leader did not for the moment
weaken the Bohemian armies, and able leaders formed in
Zizka's school took the command of the utraquist forces.^
"Zizka's blindness had that advantage, that his military

^ Stari Letopisove Cesti (ancient Bohemian Chronicles).
^ ^ Zacharias Theobaldus {Hussitenkrieg) records several epitaphs on
Zizka, which are reprinted by Lenfant in his Histoire de la Guerre des
Hussites. They are not older than the sixteenth century. The most
characteristic of them is the following —

" Strennuus in bellis hoc dormit Zizka sepulchro
Zizka suae gentis gloria, Martis honos
Ille duces scelerum monacbos, pestemque nefandam
Ad Stygias justo fulmine trusit aquas
Surget adhuc rursus, quadratae cornua cristae
Supplicii ut poenas, quas meruere luant."
The "quadratae cornua cristae" are, of course, the monks, against
whom these lines breathe such bitter hatred.
^ Tomek, /an Ziika.

144 Bohemia

talents had been already largely transferred to his lieutenants
and aides-de-camp. Obliged to see through their eyes, he
taught them all the better to notice the advantages afforded
either by the disposition of the ground, or by his own
experience in the distribution of his forces."^

Divisions among Zizka's followers arose almost imme-
diately after his death, the causes of which do not appear
clearly from contemporary records. One of the parties
retained the name of Taborites, while the other, consisting
probably of Zizka's more immediate associates, assumed
that of the Orphans, thus indicating that they had, in losing
Zizka, lost their father. The two parties appear to have
divided the captured towns and castles among themselves ;
Tabor remained the head-quarters of the Taborites, while
Kralove Hradec became the principal stronghold of the Or-
phans. The first commander of the Orphans was Kune^ of
Belovic, and of the Taborites, Hvezda of Vicemilic. The two
priests Prokop(who are better known to readers of history, and
whom Aenaeas Sylvius ^ mentions as immediate successors
of lizksi) only obtained command of the Hussite forces
somewhat later.

The estrangement of the old followers of ^izka was merely
temporary, but it none the less raised the hopes of the utra-
quist nobles and their allies of Prague. They believed that
if they succeeded in suppressing the more advanced faction,
it would become easier for them to make terms with their
foreign enemies, and perhaps to secure the recognition of
Prince Sigismund Korybut as king. Warfare between the
national or utraquist parties — the Taborites and the Orphans
forming one, the Praguers and the nobles allied with them the
other side — broke out in various parts of Bohemia early in
the year 1425. After the capture of the castle of Wozic by
the Taborites, whose leader, Havezda, was mortally wounded
during the siege, peace was concluded between the con-
tending parties. This time also we are not informed as to
the terms of the agreement. We are only told that it was
decided that all the Bohemians should together undertake a
campaign against Sigismund and his son-in-law, Albert of
Austria. Probably in consequence of the agreement of
Vozic, a Diet — presided over by Prince Korybut — assembled
at Prague, at which not only members of all the national
parties, but also some of the papal party were present.
* Palack^. * Hisiorica Bohemica,

An Historical Sketch 145

Some members of the latter party about this date concluded
a truce with the utraquists, as their expectations of help
from King Sigismund gradually decreased.

King Sigismund had, however, by no means abandoned
his hopes of regaining Bohemia. Before the treaty of Vozic
had been concluded, the king had collected a large army
in Moravia, intending to enter Bohemia. The various
forces of the utraquists now united according to the agree-
ment, marched against him, and forced him to evacuate
Moravia ; they then pursued him into Austria, where they
besieged and captured the town of Retz. During the siege,
Bohuslav of Schwamberg, who had succeeded Hvezda of
Vicemilic as leader of the Taborites, was killed ; and
Prokop, surnamed the Great, a married Taborite priest
who belonged to a family of Prague citizens, became their
chief.

The German princes had meanwhile begun again to take
up arms against the Bohemians, whom they hated as
heretics and as belonging to a hostile race. An assembly
of German princes, presided over by Duke Frederick of
Saxony, took place at Nuremberg (end of May 1426), when
it was decided again to invade Bohemia. The matter
became more urgent when the news arrived that the
Bohemians were besieging the town of Usti,^ which, though
situated in Bohemia, had been pledged by King Sigismund
to the Dukes of Saxony. Even before the return of her
husband, the Duchess Catherine equipped a large force, which
was to march to the aid of Usti. She herself accompanied
the soldiers as far as the Bohemian frontier, exhorting them
not only to be brave but prudent. The German army was
70,000 men strong, while the Bohemians, led by Prince
Korybut, Victorin of Podebrad, Prokop the Great, and
other commanders, only mustered 25,000 men. When the
Germans arrived near Usti on Sunday morning (June 16,
1416), the Bohemians wrote to them begging them that,
should God help them, they would receive them (the
Bohemians) " in good grace " (as prisoners) ; they might
then expect the same from them. But the Germans in
their pride and haughtiness, relying on the strength of their
army, answered defiantly " that they would let no heretic
live." The Bohemians then swore to one another that

^ Generally known as Usti nad Labem, to distinguish it from Usti
and Orlici. The German name of the town is Aussig.

146

Bohemia

they also would have no mercy on any man.^ The Bohe-
mians were unwilling to fight on Sunday, but seeing that
battle was inevitable, they all knelt down and prayed to
God with great piety and humility. Korybut in a fervent
speech entreated them to meet the enemy bravely and
with a cheerful mind. On the advice of Prokop, who here
adopted the defensive tactics of his master Zizka, the Bohe-
mian army occupied a hill named Behani, near the village
of Predlitz, and at no great distance from the town of Usti,
where the wagon-forts could be firmly established. The
Germans attacked bravely, and arrived close to the enemies'
lines, when the Bohemians, who had reserved their fire,
discharged all their guns at close quarters. A panic among,
the German forces ensued. The slaughter of the Germans
was terrific, and their flight continued till they reached the
mountains that divide Bohemia from Saxony. The Bohe-
mians, as had been agreed, took no prisoners, and twenty-
four counts and lords who knelt down before the victors
demanding grace were instantly killed. The Germans lost
over 15,000 men during the battle and the rout that
followed it. The Bohemian losses were very slight, though
certainly considerably greater than the number of thirty
men which some contemporary writers give. The camp
and supplies of the Germans also fell into the hands of the
Bohemians, who mockingly said that their enemies had.
incurred the papal ban, as they had so largely enriched the
heretics. The town of Usti surrendered the day after the:
battle, and was burnt down by the Bohemians.

The news of this great victory over the Hussites caused a,
panic in the whole of Northern Germany, where an imme-
diate invasion of the Bohemians was expected. Many
towns were newly fortified, and in others the fortifications,
were repaired. These apprehensions proved unfounded, at
least for the moment, as internal dissensions broke out-
among the Bohemians immediately after their great victory.
This quarrel, in which we again find the Taborites and-
Orphans on one side, the Praguers and utraquist nobles on
the other, was, however, of short duration ; only in one
district did actual war between the opposed parties take
place. It is certain that before the end of the year 1426.
the national parties in Bohemia were again on friendly

^ Palacky, quoting contemporary records.

An Historical Sketch 147

terms, for we read that early in the following year the
Taborites and Orphans again entered Moravia and drove
Sigismund's son-in-law, Duke Albert of Austria, out of that
country. They then followed him into his own dominions,
where they defeated him in a great battle at Zwettl (March
12, 1427), in which gooo Austrians fell.

Almost immediately afterwards an event took place
which not improbably was decisive in determining the
future of the Hussite movement. Dissensions again broke
out among the clergy of Prague ; some priests had — to
strengthen the alliance with the Taborites — permitted
greater deviations from the ritual and dogma of the
Roman Church than the Articles of Prague authorized.
Among the prominent members of this party was John of
Rokycan, v/hom Archbishop Conrad had consecrated as
Vicar- General, and Peter Payne, an Englishman by birth
who was generally known as " Magister Englis." The
teaching of these and some other priests caused a reaction
among the more moderate Calixtines; their leader was
Magister John Pribram, and this party enjoyed the favour
of Prince Korybut. It seems certain that the prince had
entered into negotiations with Pope Martin V. He pro-
bably hoped that by obtaining from the Pontiff some such
concessions as were afterwards granted by the Compacts of
Basel, he could pacify Bohemia, and then become its undis-
puted ruler. There was no time to mature these plans.
On April 17, 1427, Korybut was suddenly seized in the
castle of Waldstein; his adherents made an unsuccessful
attempt to liberate him, but he was afterwards allowed to
return to his own country. Magister Pribram and other
ecclesiastics of the moderate party were also exiled from
Prague.

There is no doubt that the retirement of Prince Korybut
was a decisive blow to the party which hoped to establish
an independent monarchy under a sovereign who accepted
the Articles of Prague. It also — monarchy being at that
time the only possible form of government over an extended
area of country — ultimately proved fatal to the hopes of
those who wished to preserve the autonomy of Bohemia,
as well as the religious ceremonies which had become so
dear to its people.

A monarch of Slav nationality — belonging to the reign-
ing family of Poland, in which country sympathy with the

148

Bohemia

Hussites was at that time very strong ^ — would perhaps
have fully succeeded in a task in which George of Podebrad
was only partially and temporarily successful.

As soon as the internal dissensions had for a time ceased,
the Bohemians again turned their attention to their foreign
enemies. They now, for the first time, assumed the offen-
sive. An army commanded by Prokop the Great, Prokop
the Less, leader of the Orphans, and by other chiefs,
entered Lusatia and Silesia, and after having ravaged the
country in every direction returned to Bohemia laden with
booty. This was the first of a series of warhke incursions
of the Hussites into Germany, which it will be unnecessary
to detail. The cruelty of the Hussites during the invasions
of Germany long remained traditional in that country;
impartial judges will, however, have to admit that the
Hussites, on the whole, behaved with more humanity in
Germany than did the crusading armies during their re-
peated invasions of Bohemia.

Another of these invasions was at that time being pre-
pared. King Sigismund was engaged in warfare with the
Turks during the whole of the years 1427 and 1428, but
Pope Martin V induced several of the German princes to
undertake a new crusade against the Hussites. As leader
of the crusade the Pope chose Henry Beaufort, bishop of
Winchester, who was made a cardinal at the same time ;
this honour was also conferred on the old enemy of the
Hussites, John " the Iron," now bishop of Olomonc. His
relationship to the royal family of England ^ gave Cardinal
Henry no small influence ; this, as well as the cardinal's
long experience of secular affairs, probably governed the
Pope's choice. The cardinal, who was appointed apostolic
legate for Bohemia, Hungary, and Germany, and received
full powers from the Pope, himself accompanied the in-
vading army, though the Margrave Frederick of Branden-
burg assumed the military command. The Duke of
Bavaria, the Archbishops of Maintz and Trier, the Bishops
of Bamberg and Wiirzburg, were among the many temporal
and ecclesiastical princes who in person took part in the
crusade. The total force of the invading army consisted,

^ Want of space renders it impossible to enter further into the little
known subject of the extension of the Hussite movement to Hungary,
Toland, and other parts of Eastern Europe.

^ He was a legitimized son of John of Gaunt and Catharine Swynford.

An Historical Sketch 149

according to the lowest estimates, of 80,000 horsemen and
the same number of infantry ; some contemporary writers,
however, give much higher figures. Cardinal Henry him-
self was accompanied by a body-guard of 1000 English
archers. It was decided this time to attack Bohemia from
the west, in which part of the country — the district of Plzen
— the papal party had more adherents than in any other.
The invading army first laid siege to the town of Stfibro,
which was bravely defended by the Hussite leader Pfibik of
Klenau, though his garrison consisted of two hundred men
only. The Bohemians, as usual, united in the moment of
peril, immediately marched to his aid under the command
of the two Prokops, but with a very small force,^ " prepared "
— to use Palacky's words — "to defend the chalice against
the whole Christian world." When the Bohemian army
arrived at a distance of three (German) miles from Stfibro
on August 27th, 1247, a terrific panic seized the crusaders
at the mere news of their approach. The whole army fled
in a wild rout till they reached the town of Tachov. They
were met by Cardinal Henry of Winchester, who entreated
them, if they valued their future salvation, not to fly before
heretic forces so far inferior to their own. He caused the
papal standard to be displayed, and put himself at the head
of those whom he had persuaded to attempt to rally.
Through his efforts the crusaders, or more probably part of
their army, remained at Tachov, prepared to face the
Bohemians. When the latter, however, arrived two days
later, their appearance had the same result as at Stribro.
The whole army fled in wild confusion in the direction of
the Siimava, or Bohemian forest, which here constitutes the
frontier between Bohemia and Germany. Thousands of
Germans were killed by the Bohemians, who continued the
pursuit as far as the passes of the Sumava. The princes of
the empire, who seem to have undertaken the crusade in a
very half-hearted spirit, were unable to control their men.
All the prayers and entreaties of Cardinal Henry proved of
no avail ; it was in vain that he seized the standard of the
empire, in a state of furious excitement tore it into shreds
in the presence of the princes, and then with fearful im-

^ Palack^ himself considers the figures he gives — 15CX) horsemen and
16,000 infantry — too low ; it will seem probable to many that the
Bohemian chroniclers of the Hussite wars sometimes understated the
forces of their countrymen and exaggerated those of the crusaders.

150 Bohemia

precations threw it at their feet. The English cardinal was
at last obliged to join in the general stampede, and narrowly
escaped becoming a prisoner of the heretics.^

This rout of the invaders was again followed by internal
disturbances, especially in the township of Prague. A dis-
pute arose between the community of the Stare Mesto (Old
Town) and the Nov^ Mesto (New Town) with regard to the
distribution of the confiscated ecclesiastical property. The
inhabitants of the new town were aided by the Orphans,
while the more conservative burghers of the old town
attempted to re-establish their former alliance with the
utraquist nobles, which had been interrupted by the
deposition of Prince Korybut.

These disturbances do not for the moment appear to
have been of great importance, as we read that in December
of the same year (1427) Prokop the Great marched into
Hungary at the head of a Hussite army. He ravaged a
wide extent of country apparently without experiencing any
resistance from the Hungarians. Prokop afterwards returned
to Moravia, where he was joined by reinforcements. He
then undertook a new invasion of Germany. Penetrating
far into Silesia he burnt the suburbs of Breslau, and forced
many of the Silesian princes to conclude treaties of peace
and even of aUiance with Bohemia. The Bishop of Breslau,
who, aided by some Silesian princes and towns, attempted
to oppose the invincible Bohemians, was defeated in a very
sanguinary encounter at Neisse (March 18, 1428), in which
the Germans are said to have lost 9000 men. During the
same year other Hussite bands invaded and ravaged the
districts of Austria and Bavaria which are nearest to the
Bohemian frontier.

The complete failure of all efforts forcibly to subdue
Bohemia made Sigismund, at least for a time, seriously
meditate on the possibility of a peaceful settlement. On
the other hand, the utraquist nobles, among whom Menhard,
lord of Jindfichuv Hradec, was now the most prominent,
after the departure of Korybut, began to endeavour to
reconcile King Sigismund with the Bohemian people. Men-
hard of Jindfichuv Hradec wished to arrange a meeting
between Sigismund and Prokop the Great, at that moment
the most important representative of the utraquist or Hussite
cause. It was suggested that Prokop should visit the nominal
1 Palack^.

An Historical Sketch 151

King of Bohemia, who was then residing at Presburg, not
far from the Moravian frontier. Prokop did not refuse this
proposal. As soon as a safe-conduct had been obtained, the
Bohemian leader, accompanied by Menhard of Jindfichuv
Hradec, by Magister Payne, and a few other followers, and
by an escort of only two hundred horsemen, started for
Presburg, where they arrived on April 14, 1429. The de-
liberations that took place did not at first appear hopeless ;
both parties were indeed anxious to terminate the war.
Kling Sigismund, who had assumed a conciHatory attitude
in consequence of his many defeats, received the Hussite
envoys graciously. He entreated them to return to the
papal doctrine, or, were that impossible, at least to suspend
all hostilities till after the opening of the great Council at
Basel, which was to meet within two years ; to this Council
he wished them to refer all disputed points concerning
doctrine or ritual.

The proposed truce was distinctly unfavourable to the
Bohemians, who by accepting it would have lost the advan-
tage of their recent military successes, while affording their
enemies time to prepare new armaments. The Bohemian
envoys consequently declined to give an answer to this pro-
posal, stating that it was impossible for them to do so before
the Estates of Bohemia had been consulted. On the other
hand, they entreated King Sigismund to accept their articles
of belief, assuring him that, should he do so, they would
rather have him as their king than any one else. This
proposal irritated Sigismund, who swore to God that he
would rather die than err in his faith.

These negotiations thus ended in failure, which became
still more evident when the Diet assembled at Prague
(May 23, 1429). The ambassadors whom Sigisitiund had
sent there questioned the Diet as to its willingness to be
represented at the future Council and to conclude a truce ;
the Diet, however, made its consent dependent on conditions
which Sigismund was certain not to accept. The Estates
declared that they were prepared to recognize the future
Council if the Greeks, the Armenians, and the Patriarch of
Constantinople (all of whom partook of the communion in
both kinds) were duly represented, A further condition was
that the Council should he held according to the law of God
and not according to that of the Pope ; so that not only the
Pope but the whole Christian world could freely express its

152 Bohemia

opinion. Should such a Council assemble, they were ready
to send to it wise, prudent, and pious men, and to furnish
them with full powers. As to the truce, the Estates were
only prepared to grant it should Duke Albert of Austria
evacuate Moravia, which country had been ceded to him by
the Emperor and King Sigismund. They also made several
other reservations, of which the most important were, that
the truce should only be valid for Sigismund's own territories,
but not for Bavaria and Saxony ; also that all those who had
formerly accepted the utraquist doctrine and then deserted
it should be excluded from the truce.

King Sigismund, as was inevitable, considered these
proposals to be inadmissible; he had, in fact, immediately
after the rupture of the negotiations of Presburg, again
begged the German princes to arm against the heretics.
Pope Martin V, the most indefatigable enemy of Bohemia,
also caused a new crusade to be preached against the land.
Special reliance was placed on England. The cardinal-
legate Henry of Winchester had equipped a force of 5000
men, with which he crossed the seas in July (1429). On his
march through Belgium the cardinal was recalled, and
ordered, instead of continuing his march to Bohemia, to
proceed with his troops to France, where the victories of
Joan of Arc at that time rendered his presence necessary.
The cardinal obeyed reluctantly, but was forced to do so,
as his troops declared that they would in any case, even
against his wish, march into France, as their king had
ordered them to do so.

The Germans seized on the abandonment of the English
expedition as an excuse for giving up the intended crusade.
They were comforted by the hope that, after defeating the
English, Joan of Arc would appear in Bohemia and ex-
terminate the heretics. A very menacing letter ^ which she

1 This curious letter, printed in Pubitschka's Bohemian history, is
unfortunately too long in its entirety. Joan of Arc begins by saying :
" Jam dudum mihi Johanne puelle rumor ipse famaque pertulit quod ex
veris Kristianis Heretici et Saracenis similes facti veram religioneni
atque cultum sustulistis assumpsistique superstitionem fedam ac nefariam
quam dum tueri et augere studetis nulla est turpido neque condeliti
quam non andeatis." Joan of Arc further tells the Bohemians thai
"nisi in bellis anglicis essem occupata jam-pridem visitatum vos venis'
sem Verumtamen nisi emendatos vos intelligam dimittam forte angli
canos et adversus vos proficiscar ut . . . vosque vel heresi privem vel
tiva." Should they, however, submit to the Roman creed, " Vestras

'^ Mi

ni aM

is-H

ii.a

An Historical Sketch 153

was supposed to have written to the Bohemians, and which
for a time was widely circulated, confirmed them in their
hopes.

The Germans, though they had so easily abandoned their
intention of invading Bohemia, were not long destined to
enjoy peace. In the same year (1429) the Bohemians again
attacked them in their own country. During the summer
small detachments of Bohemians had already pillaged the
neighbouring districts of Lusatia, but in December Prokop
the Great led into Germany an army greater than any the
Bohemians had ever before assembled for warfare beyond
their frontiers. This adventurous expedition, of which
want of space makes it impossible to give a detailed
account, first marched into Saxony, where the Duke of
Saxony and other German princes had assembled an army
of 10,000 men near Leipzig; this army, however, dispersed
at the mere news that the dreaded Bohemians were ap-
proaching. The Bohemians then continued their march
through Germany, burning down many towns, and ravaging
the country in every direction. The general terror was so
great that even towns distant from their line of march like
Hamburg and Liineberg prepared their defences. The
Bohemians, however, marched southward, intending to
attack the city of Nuremberg before returning to their
country.

Frederick of Hohenzollern, Margrave of Brandenburg,
and Burgrave of Nuremberg, who seems already to have
been gifted with the political insight which has ever since
been characteristic of his race, saved the town from the
danger that menaced it. At a personal interview that took
place between him and Prokop and other Bohemian
generals at Kulmbach (Feb. 6, 1430), Frederick concluded
a truce with the Bohemians in his own name as well as in
that of the German princes and the towns that were then

ad me Ambassiatorcs mittatis ; ipsis dicam quid illud sit quod facere
vos opporteat." The letter ends with renewed threats should the
Bohemians remain obstinate. This letter, the original spelling of which
I have retained, is printed in Pubitschka's Chronologische Geschichtc v.
Bohem (pf. vi. vol. i). It is dated from " Suliaci (Sully) iii Marci
1429." Palacky also mentions it, and tells us, as a proof of the im-
portance which was at the time attached to it, that he found a copy of
it among the documents of the Imperial chancellory referring to Emperor
Sigismund's reign. Mr. Anatole France, in his Vie de Jeanne d ArCj
has republished this letter in a somewhat different form.
F2

154 Bohemia

allied with him. The Bohemians promised, on payment of
a large sum of money, to return to their own country. It
was also agreed — and this condition probably seemed the
most onerous to the papal partisans — that a meeting should
take place at Nuremberg between papal and utraquist
ecclesiastics; and the validity of the Articles of Prague
was to be there discussed. In consequence of opposition
on the part of the Pope, this interview never took place.
The Bohemians meanwhile returned to their land " after a
more glorious campaign against the Germans than any
(other) that is noted in the chronicles. Had they, like their
ancestors, desired glory, they would have marched as far as
the Rhine and have subdued many countries."^

All contemporary records note the great impression
which the victorious march of the Bohemians through
Germany produced all over Europe. The danger of the
Hussite movement spreading to the neighbouring countries
seemed an increasing one. The report of the constant
victories of the Hussites reached France, and even distant
Spain. Being considered as a proof that God was on the
side of the Bohemians, it caused similar movements (which
were, however, rapidly suppressed) to break out in those
countries. The more far-seeing adherents of the papal
cause now began seriously to reflect whether, the forcible
suppression of the heretics appearing impossible, a peaceful
agreement with them could be achieved. The German
princes were also anxious for peace.

Where political parties are constituted and divided from
one another solely by reference to social considerations,
there is no little danger for the State. Such a condition of
things did not exist in Bohemia at the moment, for a large
part of the utraquist nobility were in alliance with the
Praguers, and a few nobles and knights were even still
found in the Taborite camp. But the Hussite movement
constantly tended towards becoming more and more
democratic.

The mere fact that Prokop the Great, a man of modest
birth, had become the leader of vast armies and negotiated
on terms of equality with dukes and princes could not fail
to excite in Germany all those who were dissatisfied with the
existent order of things. Sympathy with the followers of
Hus had on isolated occasions manifested itself in Germany,
^ Palack^, quoting from contemporary chroniclers.

An Historical Sketch 155

and it did not seem impossible that, should the Hussites
continue their invasions, even the old racial hatred between
Slavs and Teutons might be insufficient to prevent the
people from fraternizing with the invaders.

On the other hand, the Bohemians, and especially the
utraquist nobles and the burghers of Prague, were also
desirous of peace. A ten years' struggle against almost all
Europe had not unnaturally exhausted the country. It was
impossible, without incurring the risk of starvation, to keep
the whole able-bodied male population constantly under
arms. The Bohemian leaders had, therefore, been obliged
to strengthen their armies by enlisting foreign mercenaries.
The great booty the Bohemian armies obtained rendered
this course easy. Large numbers of Poles and Ruthenians
— attracted not only by the hope of plunder but also by
affinity of race, and in the case of the Ruthenians also
of religion — flocked to the Bohemian standards. Many
Germans, even, were now found in the Hussite armies.
This change in the composition of the utraquist forces, who
were no longer Zizka's "warriors of God," contributed to
further the desire for peace among the more moderate
Bohemians, particularly among the then very powerful
utraquist priesthood.

As it was certain that unconditional subjection to the
Pope's authority could be enforced on the Bohemians only
at the point of the sword, it was consistent with the ideas of
the age that a General Council of the Church was the only
available expedient. The Hussites had all along considered
the accusation of heresy as the greatest of insults ; and they
strenuously maintained that they formed a part of the uni-
versal Church, and therefore could not and did not directly
dispute the authority of a General Council. They main-
tained, however, as has already been noted, that no Council
could be considered as a general one in which the Eastern
Church was unrepresented.^ They also wished it to be
stipulated that the decision on all' disputed questions should
lie with the Council and not the Pope.

^ This point of view seems greatly to have irritated the adherents of
the papal cause ; in a letter of the year 143 1, addressed to the King of
Poland, King Sigismund says that "the Bohemians only recognize the
Council under certain conditions, demanding that the Indians [su],
Greeks, Armenians, and schismatics, in fact, all who believe in Christ,
should be present at the Council, as well as other things to write which
would be more ridiculous than useful." (Letter, quoted by Palack^.)

156

Bohemia

In consequence of the general desire for peace, several
German princes, as well as the University of Paris, earnestly
petitioned Pope Martin V to comply with the universal
wish, and assemble a General Council of the Church. The
Pope was strongly opposed to this, as he still held the view
that force of arms was the only means of ending the Hussite
troubles. Martin was at that time negotiating with King
Vladislav of Poland for the purpose of inducing him to
attack the Bohemian heretics. These negotiations were
unsuccessful. King Vladislav, over whom his nephew,
Prince Korybut — an old friend of Bohemia — had at that
moment great influence, assumed a less hostile attitude
against the Hussites than he had shown for some time.

Though still hoping to organize another crusade, Pope
Martin now gave a reluctant consent to the assembling of
the Council. It was decided that it should meet at Basel
on March 3, 143 1, and the Pope directed Cardinal Julius
Cesarini to preside over it as his representative. Cardinal
Cesarini was at the same time appointed papal legate for
Germany, and instructed above all things to urge the
German princes to make one more effort to subdue Bohe-
mia by force of arms. The cardinal therefore first pro-
ceeded to Nuremberg, where Sigismund, in the spring of
the year 1431, had assembled a Diet of the Empire. The
Diet almost unanimously decreed a general armament of
all Germany against the heretics. Cardinal Cesarini sent a
message to Basel, w^here the members of the Council were
already beginning to arrive, informing them that their
deliberations were to be deferred till after the end of the
crusade, in which he himself intended to take part.

The Bohemians, as usual, united in view of the common
peril, though we read of another serious dispute between
the priests of Tabor and those of Prague about this time
(April 143 1 ). A general meeting of the Bohemian leaders
took place at Kutna Hora, in which twelve regents were
chosen for the provisional government of the land. The
regents included members of all the various utraquist
parties, the utraquist nobles not excepted. The assembly
soon transferred the seat of its deliberations to Prague.
Ambassadors of the Emperor Sigismund appeared before it,
though Sigismund had undoubtedly already decided again
to appeal to the fortune of war. It was here agreed between
the regents and the envoys of Sigismund that the Bohemians

An Historical Sketch 157

should send ambassadors to Cheb, where they were to meet
Sigismund himself and several of the German princes.

The negotiations at Cheb — as all parties perhaps expected
— met with no result. Differences of opinion as to the
composition and the powers of the future Council were the
principal obstacle.

The new crusade against Bohemia, destined to be the
last one, thus became inevitable. The Bohemian ambassa-
dors returned to Prague (May 31), informed the people
that all hope of peace had vanished, and called the whole
nation to arms against the expected invaders. Prokop the
Great, for the moment, became actually, though not nomin-
ally, dictator of Bohemia. He assembled an army of 50,000
infantry and 5000 cavalry, to which all the utraquist parties
contributed; but it was noticed that many lords of that
faith, though they sent their contingents, did not themselves
join Prokop's standards. Prince Korybut of Poland, how-
ever, rejoined the Bohemian forces in the hour of peril,
though only as a volunteer. The army of the crusaders,
commanded by Frederick, Margrave of Brandenburg, with
whom was Cardinal Cesarini — King Sigismund having
returned to Nuremberg — only crossed the Bohemian frontier
on August I. The crusaders, and particularly the papal
legate, were full of hope that this expedition would at last
succeed in extirpating the Bohemian heretics. The cardinal
had just received a large sum of money from the new Pope,
Eugenius IV,^ to aid in the expenses of the campaign, and
was so certain of victory that he had already written to
Sigismund asking for a grant of land in Bohemia, as soon as
the country should have been conquered.

The army of the crusaders, according to the lowest
estimates, consisted of 90,000 infantry and 40,000 horse-
men. Again attacking Bohemia from the west, they first
laid siege to the town of Tachov, known already from one
of the former crusades. Unable to capture the strongly-
fortified city, they stormed the little town of Most, and
here, as well as in the surrounding country, committed the
most horrible atrocities ^ on a population a large part of
which had never belonged to the utraquist faith. The
crusaders, advancing in very slow marches, now penetrated

1 Eugenius IV succeeded Martin V as Pope in the year 143 1.
- This is admitted even by Aenaeas Sylvius {Historica Bohemicd)^ a
writer who was, of course, hostile to the Hussite cause.

158

Bohemia

further into Bohemia, till they reached the neighbourhood of
the town of Domazlice. On August 14 Prokop the Great
and his troops also arrived in the neighbourhood of that
town. " It was at three o'clock that the crusaders, who were
encamped in the plain between Domazlice ^ and Horsuv Tyn,
received the news that the Hussites were approaching and
that the decisive battle was near. Though the Bohemians
were still a (German) mile off, the rattle of their war-wagons
and the song, "All ye warriors of God," which the whole
army was intoning, could already be heard." The cardinal
and the Duke of Saxony ascended a neighbouring hill, so as
to be able to inspect the ground where the battle would
take place. Suddenly they heard a great noise in the
German camp, and noticed that the German horsemen
were dispersing in every direction, and that the wagons
were driving off to the rear. " What is this ? " said the
cardinal. " Why are these wagons throwing off their loads ? "
Directly afterwards a messenger, sent by the Margrave of
Brandenburg, arrived, announcing that the array was in full
flight : the cardinal should therefore think of his own
safety, and fly to the forest before it was too late. The
cardinal escaped with great difficulty, menaced not by the
Bohemians, but by the crusaders, who threw all responsi-
bility for the disaster on him. To save him, the Bishop of
Wiirsburg induced him to assume the dress of his military
retinue. He thus escaped disguised as a common soldier,
riding away very mournfully, and remaining a whole day
and night without partaking of food or drink. ^ The victory,
though for the Bohemians an almost bloodless one, was
the most decisive they ever gained. The Hussites this
time, better provided with cavalry than usual, pursued the
enemy far into the passes of the Bohmerwald, and inflicted
immense losses. This victory for a time put a stop to all
attempts to coerce Bohemia. Cardinal Cesarini now
becam.e at the Council the strongest advocate of a peace-
ful agreement with the utraquists. About the same time
that the battle of Domazlice took place Bohemia was also
invaded from the north by some of the Silesian princes,
and from the east by Duke Albert of Austria. Both these
attacks were successfully repulsed ; the priest Prokop " the

^ In German, "Tauss."

2 Abridged from Palack^'s account of the battle, which is founded on
the narrative of John of Segovia, who, as a personal friend of Cesarini,
probably had many details from the Cardinal himself.

An Historical Sketch 159

Lesser" (Prokupek), leader of the Orphans, specially
distinguishing himself by his defence of Moravia against
the Austrians. With the exception of Plzefi and a few-
isolated castles, the regents now held undisputed dominion
over the whole of Bohemia and Moravia, as well as over a
large part of Silesia ; in the latter country, however, their
authority was always contested.

By their victory at Domazlice the Bohemians attained
the summit of their military glory.^ At no period was the
fate of Europe so completely in their hands as at that
moment. The idea of opposing them in the field, which
even before this crowning victory was scouted by many, now
became an absurdity. The Bohemians, on the other hand,
still desired peace. It has, perhaps, not been sufficiently
noted that they were entirely unaffected by the intoxication
of victory. They made no attempt to assert their supremacy
in Europe, which would not have been impossible for them
at this moment, though the limited extent of the country
and number of their population rendered the prolonged
retention of power impossible.

When the Council of Basel, soon after the arrival of
Cardinal Cesarini, sent a letter (October 15, 143 1) to the
Bohemians, inviting them to send deputies to the Council,
the proposal was on the whole favourably received. The
death of Archbishop Conrad (December 1431) contributed
to render the moderate utraquists, and especially the nobles
of that faith, desirous of an agreement with the Pope. The
archbishop had hitherto consecrated their priests, and they
were now dependent on Rome, as they wished to preserve
the apostolic succession of their clergy.

Very lengthy negotiations between the Bohemians and
the Council now began; and they at last resulted in a
compromise that procured at least temporary tranquillity.

^ The great rejoicing and pride of the Bohemians on the occasion of
this brilliant triumph appear very clearly in the Latin song of Lawrence
of Brezova. He thus describes the flight of the Romanists —
'* Sic isti de Bohemia
!Metu palentes fugiunt
Et ignorantes, quo eunt

Suntne ast isti milites
Papae, regis sathalites [sic']}
Non sunt viri sed feminae
Caprae fugaces misere
Tmo paventes lepores
Aut exturbatae volucres."

i6o Bohemia

Even a summary account of these negotiations, and of the
numerous embassies sent by the Council to Prague, and by
the Bohemians to Basel, would be beyond the purpose of
this book. It will be sufficient to mention one or two of
the most important deliberations and their final result.

It is very much to be regretted that we have but scanty
information concerning the internal condition of Bohemia
immediately after the great victory of Domazlice. Con-
temporary records contain little beyond accounts of renewed
attacks on the neighbouring districts, for the commencement
of the negotiations as yet involved no suspension of hostilities.
Prokop the Great seems at that moment to have exer-
cised an informal, but none the less real, dictatorship over
Bohemia. All the utraquist party (more or less willingly)
still recognized him as their leader. Prokop the Great is
one of the most prominent characters in Bohemian history.
This appears more clearly since the modem historians,
beginning with Palacky, commenced to discuss the actions
and characters of Zizka, Prokop, and the other leaders of
the Bohemian movement as they would those of other
statesmen or warriors of that age. The older writers,
following the example of Aenaeas Sylvius, generally re-
garded them as demons or magicians who, with the aid of
witchcraft and of the infernal powers, obtained victories
that could not otherwise be accounted for. Prokop the
Great was distinguished from the other Taborite leaders by
his culture and love of literature and learning. Equal to
Zizka in his enthusiasm for his nation and his creed, in
force of will and in courage, he was his superior in the
science of politics. Moreover, he was less of a fanatic
than his predecessor. Though differing from the Church
of Rome more widely than Zizka, he was more inclined to
compromise, and thus sometimes incurred the suspicions of
his own partisans. The whole energy of the party of
advanced views — both as to religious and social reforms —
was personified in this one man, and it was inevitable that the
Romish party, the Calixtines (or Praguers), and the utraquist
nobility should at last have united to bring about his fall.

As already mentioned, the letter of the Council of Basel
proposing terms of agreement was on the whole favourably
received, though there was some opposition on the part of
the Taborites, Prokop the Great at first appearing unde-
cided. A Diet was convoked by the regents at Prague in

An Historical Sketch i6r

the month of February (1432). After a long and stormy
debate it was decided that the Bohemians should send
envoys to Cheb, where they were to meet the delegates of
the Council. A further deliberation w^as then to take place.
The date of the meeting was fixed for April 27, but it was
only on May 7 that the Bohemian envoys arrived at Cheb ;
among them were Prokop the Great, John of Rokycan^
afterwards utraquist Archbishop of Prague, Peter Payne,
commonly called " Magister Englis," and a few utraquist
knights; among the delegates of the Council were
several prominent ecclesiastics. Though preliminary matters
only were discussed, the debates were very stormy. The
Bohemians referred to the fate of Hus at a previous
Council, and Prokop the Great openly questioned the
security of the safe-conduct which was to be given to the
Bohemian envoys who were to proceed to Basel. He
remarked that it was an ancient papal doctrine that no faith
need be kept with heretics. The Bohemians finally con-
sented— subject to the approval of the Diet — to send
representatives to Basel. An agreement was drawn up^
the principal points of which were a full guarantee of the
personal safety of the envoys, and of the right to express
their opinions freely, to censure the abuses of the Church,
and to defend the four Articles (of Prague). The envoys
were further promised honourable seats at the assemblies of
the Council. Finally, it was stipulated that the suspension
of Church services in the towns through which the envoys
were to pass (required by the rules of the Church, as
Bohemia was under the interdict, but resented by the
Bohemians as an insult) should not be enforced.

A new assembly of the Estates of Bohemia was held at
Kutna Hora in August (1432). The representatives of
Bohemia at the Council were then chosen, but the Diet did
not accept the proposal of a truce with the neighbouring
countries which was suggested in consequence of the de-
liberations at Cheb. The following months were spent
in negotiations for securing the safety of the Bohemian
ambassadors during their long journey.

The successful resistance offered by the Bohemians to
the vast Romanist armies, had not only in Germany —
where hatred of the Slav is traditional — but in all Western
Europe engendered a ferocious hatred of the heretics.^ It

^ As a proof of the intense hatred of the Bohemians that then

1 62 Bohemia

was therefore only after two envoys whom the Bohemians
had despatched to Basel had returned safely, and given the
most reassuring information, that the great embassy at last
started for Basel. Among its members were most of the
former envoys at Cheb. We again read the names of
Prokop the Great, John of Rokycan, and " Magister Englis."
Of the secular members of the Embassy, William Kostka
of Postupitz, Lord of Piirglitz, held the highest rank. The
embassy consisted of fifteen members, and was accom-
panied by an escort of three hundred horsemen. They
assembled near the town of Domazlice, whence they pro-
ceeded to the Bohemian frontier. They were here met by
the German troops, who, according to agreement, were to
assure their safety during their journey to Basel.

It was on the evening of January 4, 1433, that the
Bohemian embassy, which had travelled from Schafhausen
by water, arrived at Basel. They purposely and prudently
omitted to give notice of the exact time of their arrival, but
as soon as the news of their arrival spread in the town,
popular excitement was very great. An eye-witness ^ tells us
that the whole population, even the women and children,
crowded to the house-tops and windows to watch the
strange visitors, wondering at their terrific countenances and
wild eyes. The gaze of all was specially fixed on Prokop
the Great. The people said he was the man who had often
defeated great armies of the faithful, destroyed many cities,
and caused the death of thousands. They said even his
countrymen feared him, and that he was an energetic,
unconquered, and brave leader who knew no fear. The
Bohemians were hospitably received by the authorities of
the town and the members of the Council. Reciprocal
banquets took place, at which the discussion was generally,
though not invariably, of an amicable nature. A slight

prevailed in France, Palacky notices that the name of ** Bohemians "
was about this time given to the gypsies, the most despised tribe known
in Western Europe. M. Svatek has more recently attempted to explain
the application of this singular denomination to the gypsies by the fact
that many of them arrived in Western Europe with safe-conducts
signed by King Sigismund. Sigismund always retained the title of
King of Bohemia, even during the time he was excluded from the
government of the country. The arguments of M. Svatek {Cultur-
Historische Bildur aus Bbhmeii) do not seem to me to contradict
Palacky's conjecture.

^ Aenaeus Sylvius {Hist erica Bohemica).

An Historical Sketch 163

difficulty arose only two days after the arrival of the
Bohemians. As had been agreed at Cheb, the Bohemian
priests, both the Calixtines and the Taborites, celebrated
their religious services according to their own rites.
Curiosity induced many citizens of Basel to attend these
services. They found little in the Calixtine service to
gratify their curiosity, as mass was said in the ordinary way,
and the only novelty was that the faithful partook of the
consecrated wine. They were more astonished when they
witnessed the Taborite service conducted by Prokop the
Great, for he used neither altar nor vestments, and all
ceremonies were suppressed. The whole service consisted
of short prayers, a sermon, and the communion in both
kinds, of which the whole congregation partook. The
ecclesiastical authorities brought their complaints before the
Bohemian ambassadors ; they considered the permission
given to the citizens of Basel to be present at the Hussite
worship as an attempt to spread the utraquist teaching in
the town. The Bohemians answered saying that they had
invited no one to be present at their religious functions,
and that it was not their business, but that of the authori-
ties of the town, to prevent the citizens from attending
divine service according to the Bohemian rites ; the matter
was then allowed to drop.

On January lo the negotiations between the Bohemians
and the Council began. It had been agreed that each of
the four Articles of Prague should be discussed by one
of the ecclesiastics forming part of the Bohemian mission.
John of Rokycan undertook the defence of the second
" article," which treated of communion in " the two kinds,"
and "Magister Englis" that of the third one, which re-
ferred to the worldly possessions of the clergy. These
were obviously the two most important points. After the
ending of the pleading of the four Bohemian priests, four
priests chosen by the Council were to reply. The pro-
ceedings opened with a touching exhortation by Cardinal
Cesarini, at which all present, including the Bohemians,
were moved to tears. Rokycan replied, complaining
bitterly of the wrong done to his country by the aspersion
of heresy that had been put upon it ; he further expressed
sincere hope that the whole Christian world would return
to the institutions of the primitive Church. On January i6
Rokycan began his argument for the communion in two

1 64

Bohemia

kinds, and his speech was only brought to a conclusion
at the meeting of the Council on the 19th. After Rokycan
the other Bohemian ambassadors delivered their orations ;
the last of them, Peter Payne, finished his speech on the
28th. Some of these speeches caused great irritation among
the Romanist hearers. This specially applies to Magister
Payne. He praised Wycliffe and his doctrines, and alluded
to the persecution that he had endured at Oxford, stating
that he had been obliged to seek refuge in Bohemia. Payne
was violently interrupted by the English ecclesiastics who
were present, and a stormy altercation between him and
them took place.

When the Bohemian priests had finished their speeches,
Cardinal Cesarini caused a paper to be read enumerating
twenty-eight points, or "articles" as they were called, in
which the Hussite belief differed from that of the Roman
Church. The Bohemians were requested to define their
views with regard to these articles. This clever move on
the part of the cardinal placed them in a rather difficult
position, as some of these articles referred to points with
regard to which no complete agreement existed between
the Calixtines and the Taborites. Both parties, however,
agreed that only by remaining united could they expect
to obtain concessions from the Council. They therefore
gave no immediate answer. A month afterwards, John of
Rokycan made a statement in the name of the whole
Bohemian embassy. He declared that it had been agreed
at Cheb that the four Articles of Prague should form the
basis of the negotiations; the Bohemians could therefore
discuss no other questions till an accord as to the four
Articles had been obtained.

Before Rokycan had made this statement, the four priests
on the papal side had delivered their orations in answer to
those of the Bohemians. Rokycan now (March 2) began
his second speech in defence of the communion in both
kinds, refuting the arguments of his papal antagonist. After
him the other Bohemian, and then the papal orators, again
spoke in the same order; it was only on April 8 that the
last of these speeches came to a conclusion.

Before that date it had become evident to all that an
agreement was for the moment impossible. Duke William
of Bavaria, who had in the absence of the Emperor Sigis-
mund held the position of " protector " of the Council,

An Historical Sketch 165

induced four of the prominent Bohemians to meet privately
four of the leading members of the Council. Among the
latter was Cardinal Cesarini, at whose residence the dis-
cussions took place. These informal interviews did more
to further the cause of peace than the lengthy display of
rhetoric at the general meetings of the Council. The
Bohemians were beginning to see that a general reform
of the Church and a return to the order of primitive
Christianity were impossibilities. The members of the
Council, on the other hand, at last realized that con-
cessions as to the all-important question of communion
in both kinds were inevitable. During the interviews at
Cardinal Cesarini's residence it was settled that when the
Bohemian envoys, as now seemed certain, returned to their
country, they should be accompanied by representatives of
the Council; it would thus be possible to continue the
negotiations at Prague.

The Estates of Bohemia met at Prague in June (1433),
and the representatives of the Council, at whose head was
Philibert, Bishop of Coutances in Normandy, were present
at the deliberations. The members of the embassy, which
had returned from Basel, reported to the Diet on the result
of their mission. As had probably been settled at Cardinal
Cesarini's residence, they announced that the Council was
prepared to grant to Bohemia the right of receiving the
communion in both kinds, on condition of the Bohemians
returning on the Universal Church and conforming to its
regulations on all other points. This proposal was, on the
whole, favourably received by the Diet. The Estates, how-
ever, demanded that the communion in both kinds should
be obligatory in Bohemia and Moravia, and optional in
Silesia as well as in Poland, where the Hussites then had
many adherents. The deputies of the Council were not
prepared, and indeed probably had no authority, to grant
these terms. They therefore left Prague (July 14, 1433)
accompanied by the Bohemian ambassadors, who were to
continue the negotiations at Basel. On arriving there the
Bohemians informed the Council of the conditions of peace
which their countrymen were prepared to accept. They
formulated these terms in four articles that constitute (in a
subsequently slightly modified form) the famed " Compacts "
which up to the year 1567 were considered one of the
fundamental laws of the country. The Compacts, which are

1 66 Bohemia

founded on the Articles of Prague, run thus : i. The Holy
Sacrament is to be given freely in both kinds to all
Christians in Bohemia and Moravia, and to those elsewhere
who adhere to the faith of the two countries. 2. All
mortal sins shall be punished and extirpated by those
whose office it is so to do. 3. The word of God is to be
freely and truthfully preached by the priests of the Lord,
and by worthy deacons. 4. The priests " in the time of
the law of grace "^ shall claim ownership of no worldly
possessions.

The Council refused to reply to the demands of the
Bohemian envoys, stating that its decision could only be
made known to a general assembly of the Estates of Bo-
hemia. The Council, therefore, again sent delegates to
Prague, who travelled there together with the returning
Bohemian envoys.

New internal troubles in Bohemia now for a time turned
away public interest from the negotiations with the Council.
The Bohemian armies had not discontinued the warlike
expeditions which the still valid prohibition against trade
with Bohemia indeed rendered almost a necessity. We find
one of the Bohemian armies fighting as allies of Poland
against the Knights of the Teutonic Order, in the vicinity
of the Baltic Sea. At this moment, however, the Hussites
concentrated all their efforts on the capture of the town of
Plzen ; they naturally attached great importance to the
possession of this considerable Bohemian town, which was
still in the hands of the papal party. The most important
point in the negotiations with the Council was whether
communion in both kinds should be optional or obligatory
in Bohemia, and it was difficult to demand the latter
alternative as long as the Catholic town of Plzen remained
unconquered. A large army under Prokop the Great there-
fore began to besiege the city about July (1433). It was
noted that the utraquist nobles no longer joined Prokop's
forces.

The envoys of the Council reached Prague in the autumn

^ This may be shortly interpreted as signifying "henceforth." Before
acceptation by the Roman Church this article was qualified by an
explanatory note stating that priests and monks should not own
hereditary estates, and that the priests as "administrators" of the
property of the Church should manage it faithfully, according to the
injunctions of the Holy Father.

<!

i

An Historical Sketch 167

(1433). They earnestly advised the Bohemians to accept
the conditions which the Council had authorized them to
offer. Though this had been kept secret from the Bohemian
envoys, the delegates of the Council had been authorized
by it to accept the communion in both kinds as permissible,
and even to consent to the other Articles of Prague in a
modified form. The influence of the delegates, particularly
on the more aristocratic section of the utraquist party, was
evidently very considerable ; probably through the influence
of the utraquist nobles a considerable number of the
clergy were induced to accept the Compacts in the modified
form suggested by the delegates of the Council. But the
agreement, which seemed on the point of success, again
failed. The Taborites from the first were opposed to the
proposals of the Council, and the opinions of the Calixtine
clergy were divided. One party, headed by Magister
Pribram, was strongly in favour of peace, and of accept-
ing the Compacts in a modified form. Pribram even
declared that all further strife was a mortal sin. On the
other hand, many Calixtine priests, under the leadership of
John of Rokycan, strongly opposed the system of an
optional communion in the two kinds. Rokycan declared
that the system of administering communion in both kinds,
and in one and the same place, and even in the same
church, would prove a cause of constant discord. It was
on this point that the negotiations finally failed, and the
delegates of the Council left Prague (January 14, 1434).
Before starting, they urgently exhorted some of the utraquist
nobles with whom they had become intimate to take a more
active part in the politics of their country, and to use their
influence in favour of a future agreement with the Church
of Rome.

The formerly powerful Bohemian nobility had indeed,
since the departure of Prince Korybut, played a very
insignificant part, the Hussite movement having acquired a
more and more democratic character. This was felt by
many nobles, and the desire among them became general —
were they but assured of the freedom to retain the revered
chalice — to act in union with the papal nobles and suppress
the turbulent democracy of Tabor. Before the departure of
the envoys of the Council, the Estates had decided on
electing a regent, who was to rule the country with the aid
of a council of twelve members.

1 68 Bohemia

Ales of Riesenburg, a member of one of the oldest
families of the nobility, was chosen to fill this difficult post.
The occurrences in the camp before Plzen at this moment
contributed to bring matters to a crisis. The siege, which
lasted several months, demoralized the Taborite soldiers,
who ravaged the whole neighbouring country. Prokop the
Oreat, who attempted to maintain order in his camp, was
attacked by his own soldiers, and throwing up his command,
he retired to Prague. Perhaps encouraged by this event,
several nobles, with the approval of the regent, now formed
a league ^^for the restoration of peace and order in the
country." The league was joined by all the prominent
'Utraquist lords, and somewhat later also by those of the
papal party. The citizens of the old town (Stare Mesto) of
Prague, who, as already noticed, constituted the conservative
clement in the town, also adhered to the league. The
leaders of the league addressed an appeal to the Estates of
Bohemia, calling on them to join the new coalition.

The first conflict took place at Prague. The citizens of
the Stare Mesto, aided by the nobles, subdued the Nove
Mesto, which had refused to join the league. Prokop
unsuccessfully attempted to aid the citizens of the new
town. Since he had been illtreated by his own soldiers he
seemed, as VaXsLckf writes, to have lost his self-confidence
and the keenness of his intellect. The foreboding of his
tragic fate and the helplessness of the cause which he
defended no doubt overwhelmed him. He wrote, however,
to the priest Prokupek (Prokop the Less), who now com-
manded the troops before Plzen, saying that "with the
permission of God the false barons, aided by the burghers
of the old town, had defeated the brethren of the new
town." Prokop the Great therefore begged him to raise
the siege of Plzen and march with all his troops in the
direction of Prague. Prokupek acceded to his wishes, and
the leader of the Orphans joined his forces to the troops
of Prokop the Great and of the other leaders of Tabor.
The combined forces then retired in a direction eastward of
Prague.

Both the contending parties now gathered all their forces
together, in view of what all foresaw would prove a decisive
battle. The army of the nobles was now joined by almost
the whole nobility of Bohemia, from the unflinching partisans
of Rome to the most faithful Hussites, many of whom had

An Historical Sketch 169

fought under ^izka. The towns of Prague, Plzefi, and
Melnik were the only ones that cast in their lot with the
nobles. On the other hand, the army of the towns, as it
was called, besides the men of Tabor, Kralov^ Hradec, and
the minor Taborite and Orphan communities, contained the
levies of almost all the Bohemian cities, with the exception
of those mentioned above. A few knights and nobles, of
whom John Rohac, Lord of Duba, and John Kolda, Lord
of Zampach, were the most important, also remained faithful
to Tabor.

It was on the wide plain that extends between Kourim
and Cesk)^ Brod, near the centre of which lies the village
of Lipany, that the world-old struggle between aristocracy
and democracy was now once again fought out.^ The army
of the towns was led by the two Prokops, Rohdc of Duba,
Kolda of Zampach and other chiefs of the Orphans and
Taborites. The nobles were commanded by Borek of
Miletinek, an experienced general who had formerly served
under Zizka's orders. With him were the Regent Ales of
Riesenburg ; George of Podebrad, the future king ; Ulrich
of Rosenberg, leader of the papal party, and almost the
whole nobility of Bohemia. Their army was about 25,000
men strong, whilst the Taborites and townsmen, weakened
by many defections, only numbered 18,000 men. Both
armies formed behind the wagon-entrenchments, or " lagers,"
which were then so important a feature in Bohemian
warfare.

The battle (May 30, 1434) was won by Miletinek by a
stratagem. He ordered the van of his army, which was
probably drawn up in front of the wagon-entrenchment, to
simulate flight. The Taborites, perhaps rendered imprudent
by their many victories, left their entrenchments, rushing
out to pursue the flying foe. They were immediately
attacked by the horsemen of Ulrich of Rosenberg and put
to flight. While hastening back to their entrenchments
they were attacked by the rest of the army of the nobles,
who succeeded in penetrating into their "lager" at the same
time as the fugitives. The battle now became a massacre,
which continued through the whole night until the following

^ Many detailed accounts of this great battle have reached us ; they
are, however, very contradictory. The picturesque account of Aenaeas
Sylvius is too evidently an imitation of classical authors in the manner
fashionable at the time of the Renaissance.

170 Bohemia

morning. It must be considered as the extermination
rather than as the defeat of the Taborites ; 13,000 of their
men perished in the battle, and several hundred prisoners
were cruelly burnt to death in the huts in which they had
been temporarily shut up.^ A small detachment only
escaped. Prokop the Great, Prokop the Less (Prokupek),
and most of the other leaders fell in this battle. " Thus
these Bohemians could only be conquered by other
Bohemians ; they who had proved themselves invincible
to all Germans, and had spread the terror and the glory of
their name through the whole world." ^ Though of course
many Taborites still remained, yet Falscckf is undoubtedly
right in dating " the fall of Tabor " from the battle of Lipany,
rather than from the capture of the town itself (which only
took place in 1542).

The more warlike among the men of Tabor mostly left
their country. They became mercenaries in the service of
foreign countries, especially in Hungary, and the Ukraine
and other border-lands between Russia and Poland; the
Cossacks in these districts are said to have learnt and
adopted the system of warfare of the Taborites. The more
peaceful and pious Taborites, despairing altogether of a
world in which their religious views no longer prevailed,
retired to secluded spots, where they gave themselves up
entirely to prayers and devotion. They not inconsiderably
contributed to the foundation of the sect of the " Bohemian
Brethren " (Moravians) ^ which arose about this time.

The complete defeat of the more advanced party in
Bohemia was naturally followed by a reaction which ex-

^ The people of Bohemia long refused to believe in the death of the
Taborites, and maintained that they were in hiding in a cave in the
mountain Blanik, whence they were expected some day to reappear to
save Bohemia in her moment of greatest peril.

2 Bienenberg, Geschichte der Stadt Koniggrdtz.

^ The connection of the Taborites with the Bohemian Brethren was
long a disputed point in Bohemian history ; all recent Bohemian his-
torians, however, maintain its existence. Professor Goll {Quellen zur
Geschichte der Bohmischen Brilder) tells us that the Brethren did not
wish to be considered as continuators of the Taborites. They protested
against this theory with a degree of energy which was not justified by
the facts of the case. I have preferred to call the new sect " Bohemian
Brethren" rather than "Moravians," as the former denomination is
alone used by German and Bohemian writers ; their doctrines were also
not in all points identical with those of the sect now known as the
Moravians.

An Historical Sketch 171

tended both to political and to ecclesiastical affairs ; and
the reconciliation with the papal Church, together with the
general acceptation of Emperor Sigismund as king, became
certain from the moment of the battle of Lipany. A meeting
of the Estates of Bohemia and Moravia took place only
three weeks after the battle. A truce was concluded be-
tween the utraquists and the papal party, and it was decided
to negotiate with Sigismund, with a view to his assumption
of the government of the country. It was further decided
to send a deputation to Regensburg, where the Emperor
then resided, and where he had been joined by representatives
of the Council.

Sigismund received the Bohemian ambassadors (August
1434) very graciously. He assured them that he was no
stranger, and that he considered himself a Bohemian and
a citizen of Prague. He recalled to them his descent in the
female line from the man whom their ancestors had once
called away from the plough to their throne,^ and referred to
the fact that his father's (the Emperor Charles's) name was
still revered by high and low in their country. A complete
agreement was not obtained at Regensburg, though the only
disputed point now was the question to what extent com-
munion in both kinds should in future be permissible in
Bohemia and Moravia. The Bohemian representatives
declared that they wished to be in full accord with their king
before negotiating with the Council. For this purpose the
Estates again met (October 1434) at Prague. The utraquists
here made further concessions. It had become evident to
them that communion in the two kinds could not be forced
on the adherents of the papal party in Bohemia, The
Estates therefore decided to ascertain in what form com-
munion was at that moment administered in all the parochial
and other churches of Bohemia, and to propose that this
should be the rule for the future.

The Estates further demanded that the Archbishop of
Prague and his suffragans should, according to the old
institutions of the land, be elected by the Estates and the
clergy, subject to the sanction of the king; they claimed,
finally, that no Church livings in Bohemia or Moravia should
be conferred on foreigners. These demands were trans-
mitted to the Council, and it was settled that a new
deputation of the Estates should meet the king and the
^ Premysl : see Chap. II.

172 Bohemia

representatives of the Council at Brno ^ for further negotia-
tions. This meeting only took place in July 1435.

Fresh difficulties here arose, especially with regard to the
nomination of a new Archbishop of Prague. The envoys
of the Council even made preparations to return to Basel.
They were at the last moment prevented from doing so by
the efforts of Sigismund, who had already arrived at an
agreement with his future subjects on almost all points.
The Emperor even went so far as to sign a document by
which he promised to lend the Bohemians his aid in main-
taining the existing form of communion as proposed by the
last Diet at Prague, and the right of electing the Archbishop
of Prague and his suffragans. An immediate agreement
with the representatives of the Council appearing impossible,
further negotiations were deferred till a new meeting of the
Diet took place at Prague (Sept. 1435). At this assembly
the Estates unanimously elected John of Rokycan Arch-
bishop of Prague. Sigismund was informed of this election,
but an agreement still seemed far off. The Emperor had
about this time given a verbal assurance to the envoys of
the Council that he would not interfere in ecclesiastical
matters ; he thus practically cancelled the promises which
he had made to the Bohemians. The latter, on the other
hand, declined to accept the Compacts in the modified
form suggested by the Council till Rokycan had been
recognized as Archbishop of Prague both by the Emperor
and by the Roman Church. Another meeting between
the Bohemians and the Romanist envoys at Jihlava^ in
Moravia in June 1436. The representatives of the Council
still refused to ratify the election of Rokycan. They suggested
that Bishop Philibert of Coutances, who had formerly been
sent by the Council as envoy to Bohemia, should act pro-
visionally as Archbishop of Prague. This proposal greatly
incensed the Bohemians. The promises of Sigismund and
his son-in-law, Albert of Austria, that they would use all
their influence to obtain the recognition of Rokycan by the
Roman Church to a certain extent pacified the Bohemians,
particularly as the feeling in favour of peace was constantly
becoming stronger in Bohemia. On July 5, 1436, the
Bohemian deputies at last solemnly accepted and subscribed
the Compacts, with the not very important modifications
on which the Council of Basel had insisted. The repre-
* In German "Brunn." ' In German " Iglau.**

An Historical Sketch 173

sentatives then rescinded the decree of excommunication
against the Bohemians, declared them to be faithful sons of
the Church, and proclaimed peace between Bohemia and
the other nations.

Immediately afterwards Sigismund issued a decree con-
firming all the ancient rights of Bohemia. The regent Ale§
of Riesenburg resigned his office, and Sigismund was recog-
nized as King of Bohemia by all the Estates of the country.
Sigismund, now undisputed sovereign of the land, made his
entry into Prague on August 23, 1436. He was enthusias-
tically received by the people, who now at last hoped for
more peaceful times.

King Sigismund was already sixty-eight years old when he
at last secured the possession of the kingdom. He was only
to reign over Bohemia for a few months.

This period of comparative tranquillity, after so many
eventful years, may be passed over with very slight notice.
Sigismund's policy, though as reactionary as circumstances
permitted, was rendered cautious by his experiences. When
the necessary redistribution of the principal offices of State
and court took place, Sigismund attempted to exclude all
who were not either Romanists, or belonged to that part of
the utraquist party which was nearest to Rome. His views
with regard to heretics probably differed little from those he
had expressed at Constance many years before, but he was
thoroughly aware of the importance of avoiding a new out-
break of hostilities. The towns of Tabor and Kralove
Hradec, still held by the advanced party, were pacified by
treaties which guaranteed to them a certain amount of auto-
nomy. Of the few opponents of the new king, John Rohac,
Lord of Duba, was especially remarkable. Even after the
submission of the town of Kralove Hradec he continued a
guerilla warfare, the centre of which was the castle of
" Sion " — a name which, like Tabor, Oreb, and so many
others, shows how great was the effect of the recently
acquired right of studying the Scriptures. After a lengthy
siege, Rohac of Duba was obliged to capitulate uncondi-
tionally. He and his followers were afterwards publicly
executed on the market-place of the old town (Starom-
estske Namesti) at Prague. This injudicious severity
caused great indignation in Bohemia, and was probably the
principal cause of the renewed troubles during the last
months of Sigismund's life. Among others, John Kolda,

174 Bohemia

Lord of Zampach, one of the few nobles who still adhered
to the party of Tabor, again took up arms and forcibly
obtained possession of the town of Nachod.

More important than these local disturbances was the
difficulty with regard to the appointment of an Archbishop
of Prague. As already mentioned, John of Rokycan had
been elected by the Estates, but neither the Pope nor the
Council had confirmed his election. Philibert, Bishop of
Coutances, also resided in Prague, in an undefined capacity,
but with the secret approval of King Sigismund. The
king's attitude in this matter was not free from the accusa-
tion of double-dealing. " Publicly Sigismund wrote to the
Council recommending it to confirm Rokycan's nomination
as archbishop ; secretly, he advised the contrary." ^

Though no settlement of this difficult question was arrived
at, the long-expected sanction of the " Compacts " by the
Council of Basel at last reached Prague (Feb. 1437). By
order of Sigismund a decree was read out in the Bohemian,
Latin, Hungarian, and German languages, in the " Corpus
Christi " Chapel at Prague, declaring " that the Bohemians
and Moravians who received the flesh and blood of God in
both kinds were true Christians, and genuine sons of the
Church." Two inscriptions on stone were placed in the
chapel to commemorate this important event.^

Towards the end of the year (1437) Sigismund became
seriously ill, and perhaps feeling that his end was near,
decided to return to Hungary. He had already expressed
the wish to be interred in that country, at Grosswardin, in a
vault which had been specially prepared. His one remain-
ing anxiety was to secure the succession to the Bohemian
throne to his son-in-law Albert of Austria. The claim of
Albert was founded on the treaty concluded by the Emperor
Charles, according to which the houses of Luxemburg and
Habsburg had reciprocally recognized each other as heirs,
should one or the other line become extinct. Sigismund
hoped to realize his object more surely if he could establish
Albert as ruler of Bohemia during his lifetime. This
appeared to him all the more necessary in consequence of
the intrigues of his consort, the Empress Barbara. During

^ Tomek.

2 The Corpus Christi Chapel was demoJished in 1798. The tablets
containing the inscription mentioned above are preserved in the
Bohemian Museum at Prague.

An Historical Sketch 175

the Emperor's journey to Hungary his illness rapidly in-
creased, and he died at Znoymo, December 9, 1437, before
arriving in Hungary.

Contrary to the apprehensions of Sigismund in his last
days, Albert, Duke of Austria, obtained the recognition of
his right to the throne of Bohemia without much opposition.
This is the more worthy of notice as Albert had never made
a secret of his sympathy with the Germans. Even during
the years when he governed Moravia in the name of his
father-in-law, he had refused to learn the Bohemian lan-
guage. He thus naturally gave offence to the people on a
point where the national susceptibility is perhaps none the
less keen because the range of the national language is
somewhat limited. He therefore appeared to the Bohemians,
to use the words of Palacky, " as the representative of that
evil spirit which always claimed for the German a certain
superiority over the Slav, and in fact despised everything
that was Slavonic."

Albert was not able to proceed to Bohemia immediately
after the death of Sigismund. He was detained by negotia-
tions as to the succession to the crowns of Germany and
Hungary, which had also become vacant by the death of
his father-in-law. Having succeeded in obtaining his
recognition as king by the Hungarians, and having also
been chosen as king of the German Electors, Albert arrived
in Bohemia in April (1438). Sigismund had during his
short reign done everything to facilitate the succession of
his son-in-law.

The most prominent offices in the State were held by
Ulrich of Rosenberg, always an unswerving adherent of the
Roman cause, and by Menhard of Jindfichuv Hradec, who,
though an utraquist, was entirely devoted to Sigismund and
Albert. The more advanced Hussites — whose intellectual
leader was Archbishop John of Rokycan — at first recognized
Bofek of Miletinek, the victor of Lipany, as their chief. He
had endeared himself to them by affording a refuge to the
archbishop when he believed himself menaced by Sigismund.
When Miletinek died in January 1438 Ptacek, Lord of Pirk-
stein, became the leader of the more advanced utraquists ^
this party, probably influenced as much by national as by
religious motives, wished to confer the kingdom of Bohemia
on a prince of Slav nationality. Their choice fell on
Casimir, younger brother of Vladislav III, King of Poland.

176 Bohemia

Albert's partisans, who held the more important State
offices, thought that delay would weaken the chances of
their candidate. They therefore promptly assembled the
Estates at Prague, and they elected Albert as king after he
had promised to maintain the Compacts. Albert's corona-
tion as King of Bohemia followed immediately afterwards
(June 29, 1438). The party which acknowledged Ptacek
as its leader disputed the validity of Albert's election, and
still wished to secure the throne to Casimir of Poland.
King Vladislav gave his sanction to the candidature of his
brother, and sent a Polish army to Bohemia to assist his
partisans. Albert, on the other hand, obtained aid from
Hungary and Austria. Many German princes also assisted
him. Albert had warned them that if they had not been
able to conquer the Bohemians alone, during the late war,
the danger for Germany would be yet far greater were the
Bohemians united under a common dynasty with a cognate
nation like that of the Poles.

The war that now broke out was of little importance and
short duration. Eastern Europe was at that moment
seriously menaced by the Turks. Pope Eugenius IV and
the Council of Basel therefore earnestly entreated the
Bohemians and Poles to abandon their internal dissensions,
and to arm against the infidels. Albert, as King of Hun-
gary, was more than any other European sovereign exposed
to the danger of Turkish invasion. As a complete recon-
ciliation between him and the King of Poland did not seem
possible, a truce between the two sovereigns was agreed
upon at Breslau (January 1439). Albert then repaired to
Southern Hungary, which the Turks, who had already
invaded Servia, were preparing to attack. The climate of
those countries, to which he was not accustomed, seriously
affected his health. Albert fell dangerously ill from dysen-
tery, and decided to return to Vienna. During his journey
through Hungary he died (October 27, 1439).

The unexpected death of Albert left Bohemia in a state
of anarchy. There was for the moment no heir to the
throne, though it was known that Queen Elizabeth, wife of
Albert, would shortly give birth to a child. The nobility
were divided into two parties. The one, the utraquist (or,
as Palack)^, in dealing with this period, calls it, the national
party) recognized as its leaders Ptacek of Pirkstein and
George of Podebrad. Ulrich of Rosenberg was still the

An Historical Sketch 177

leader of the Romanist, or Austrian party. The anarchical
state of the country, harassed by innumerable local feuds,
which it would be wearisome to enumerate, had one advan-
tageous result. Both parties, when they met at a Diet at
Prague, were in favour of a peaceful agreement. The terms
of this agreement, which were formulated in a document
known as the " Letter of Peace " (" List mirny "), included
the acceptation of the Compacts, and the recognition of
the validity of the election of Archbishop John of Rokycan.
The Diet further pledged itself to secure by all means the
recognition of Archbishop John by the Papal See. It was
further decreed that all documents signed or donations
made by King Albert which were injurious to the rights of
the Bohemian crown, or of those nobles who had been
opposed to Albert, should be invalid. The terms of the
" Letter of Peace " were obviously very favourable to the
national party, which probably was already by far the more
powerful. The only advantage obtained by the Austrian
party was that the question of the candidature of the Polish
prince was not raised ; the national party, for reasons that
do not clearly appear, no longer regarded that candidature
with as much favour as before.

On February 22, 1440, Queen Elizabeth gave birth to a
son, who received the name of Ladislas, and who became
the rightful ruler of the land according to the views of those
who maintained the hereditary character of the Bohemian
throne. Various intrigues and the animosity of the con-
tending parties retarded the recognition of Ladislas. The
Bohemian crown was even offered to Albert, Duke of
Bavaria, but declined by him. Even after this refusal,
and after the Bohemians had decided to accept Ladislas
as their king, new difficulties arose. Frederick of Habsburg,
Duke of Styria, who had been elected king by the Germans,
claimed the guardianship of his nephew, and he even refused
to allow the infant king to be conveyed to Bohemia.

After the death of Ptacek of Pirkstein, George of Pode-
brad, son of Victorin of Podebrad, who had commanded
the Praguers during the former wars, was chosen as leader
by the national party. From the moment that George of
Podebrad became the head of the national party, its policy
assumed a more decided and energetic character. The
struggle now became a contest for the supremacy in
Bohemia between the two party-leaders, George of Pode-

178

Bohemia

brad and Ulrich of Rosenberg. In the year 1446 a great
meeting of the Estates took place at Prague. It was one of
those assembhes known in Bohemian history as a " Goneral
Diet " at which representatives not only of Bohemia but also
of Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia (all which countries at that
period formed part of what are technically known as the
lands of the Bohemian crown) were present. This Diet is
of importance in the constitutional history of Bohemia. We
here, for the first time, find the Estates clearly divided into
three chambers (known as "curiae,") namely, the lords,
knights, and citizens. The "curiae " deliberated separately,
and only met with a final decision. The resolutions of
this Diet were similar to those of previous assemblies since
the death of Albert. Complaints were again raised against
the detention of Ladislas, who, it was said, was being
brought up as a stranger to the country over which he
was destined to rule. An attempt to establish a regency
failed. The country indeed remained without any regular
government, as the authority of Menhard of Jindfichuv
Hradec on whom Sigismund had conferred the dignity of
supreme burgrave — the highest office in the country — was
not universally recognized.

The Diet further complained of the refusal of the Papal
See to recognize Archbishop John. It also accused the
Romanists of secret agitations against the Compacts.
It was also decided that a new embassy should be sent to
Rome, a mission which resulted in a complete failure. The
Papal See even withdrew from the attitude of toleration
which it had formerly assumed with regard to the Compacts.
The only promise which Pope Nicholas V (who had now
succeeded Eugenius IV) made was that he would send
Cardinal Carvajal as legate to Bohemia to inquire into the
state of affairs of the country. The steps which the Diet
took to secure the residence of Ladislas in Bohemia were
also ineffectual. When the German King Frederick heard
that the Bohemian Estates intended to send an embassy to
Vienna for this purpose, he immediately wrote to them
declaring that he entirely refused his sanction to the departure
of Ladislas.

George of Podebrad probably decided to appeal to armed
force soon after the termination of the Diet of 1446. He
believed this to be the only means of ending the anarchy
from which Bohemia was suffering. His adherents began

An Historical Sketch 179

to arm about this time. Podebrad seems to have had
evidence ^ that the efforts of the Bohemian negotiators both
at Rome and at Vienna had been secretly opposed by the
Austrian party, and especially by Ulrich of Rosenberg.
The national party decided, however, to await the result of
the mission of Cardinal Carvajal. The cardinal arrived at
Prague (May i, 1448), but his mission proved a complete
failure ; he made no secret of his conviction that the Pope
would never give his sanction to the election of Archbishop
John of Rokycan. The cardinal also openly expressed his
disapproval of communion in the two kinds, a rite which
almost all Bohemians still revered as the great privilege they
had obtained at the cost of so much blood. Questioned as
to the Compacts, he denied all knowledge of them. George
of Podebrad, who had in his custody the original of this
precious document, therefore forwarded it to him. When,
upon the failure of his mission, the cardinal left Prague
shortly afterwards, his departure caused a great outcry
among the townspeople. They accused him of having
carried away the original of the famous Compacts and
threatened him with the fate of Hus. The cardinal was
stopped on his journey by horsemen, but was on his entreaty
allowed to proceed as far as Benesov ; he here returned the
Compacts, which he had hidden among the luggage of his
carriage.

Thus the sole result of the mission of Carvajal was to
embitter yet more the contending parties in Bohemia.
George of Podebrad, secure of his allies, who had sworn
to devote their lives and their fortunes to his cause, no
longer hesitated to act. He assembled near Kutna Hora
an army of 9000 men, which was afterwards reinforced by
troops from his adherents in Northern Bohemia. With
these forces Podebrad marched on Prague, before which
city he arrived (1448). He obtained possession of the
town almost without resistance ; the citizens indeed received
him with enthusiasm. The supreme burgrave Menhard of
Jindfichuv Hradec, who appears to have been a mere pup-
pet in the hands of Ulrich of Rosenberg, was imprisoned.
New city magistrates were chosen by the people of Prague,
and John of Rokycan, disregarding the authority of Rome,
assumed the functions of archbishop.

^ Palacky clearly proves this, quoting from the correspondence of
Ulrich of Rosenberg.

i8o Bohemia

This step on the part of Podebrad led to civil war, for
which he was no doubt prepared. Ulrich, son of Menhard
of Jindfichuv Hradec, demanded the liberation of his father,
and both he and Ulrich of Rosenberg declined Podebrad's
proposal that a Diet at Prague should mediate between
them. The lords belonging to the Austrian party even con-
tracted an alliance with Kolda, Lord of Zampach, and the
few other remaining Taborites, against the national party.
Desultory warfare — twice for a short time interrupted by
negotiations — broke out in various parts of Bohemia, and
continued up to the year 145 1. Rosenberg, Ulrich of
Jindfichuv Hradec, and other lords of the Austrian party
formed a confederacy opposed to that of Podebrad. This
confederacy was, from the name of the town in which it was
concluded, known as the league of Strakonic. The lords of
the league denounced the national party as the cause of the
new troubles, and called on the Bohemian towns to join
their own confederacy.^ The result of this local warfare —
during which hardly any important engagements took place
— was almost invariably favourable to the party of Podebrad.
Rosenberg gradually retired from the contest, and every-
thing seemed to point to the regency of George of
Podebrad.

King Frederick, before starting for Rome to be crowned
as Emperor, in his capacity as guardian of King Ladislas
entrusted Podebrad with the administration of Bohemia
(October 145 1). Frederick at the same time, by a singular
agreement, made over the government of Hungary to
Matthew Corvinus. He undoubtedly hoped thus to secure
tranquillity in these two turbulent countries during his
expedition to Italy. A Diet which assembled at Prague
in the same year (1451) at last formally conferred on
Podebrad the regency which he had de facto exercised during
the last four years.

The negotiations with the Papal See concerning the
recognition of John of Rokycan as Archbishop of Prague

^ See the letter (published by Eachmann, Urkenden zta- Geschickte
Oesterreichs ini Zeit alter Kaiser Fredericks III und Kbnig Georges von
Bohmen), addressed to the citizens of Cheb by the lords of Strakonitz,
informing them that ** unfortunately in our land lately great discord
and ill-will have sprung up through some of the lords of Bohemia,"
and begging them, ** as they at all times gladly served the crown of
Bohemia," to send a contingent to join the troops of the confederacy.

An Historical Sketch i8i

and the sanction of the Compacts had continued meanwhile.
Pope. Nicholas now openly opposed them, and the conviction
that an agreement with Rome was impossible gradually
gained ground in Bohemia, This conviction led many
Bohemians to contemplate a union with the Eastern
Church. The details of this movement are unfortunately
very obscure. It seems almost certain that Archbishop
John, though he did not oppose it, was not its originator.
There is great probability in favour of Palacky's suggestion
that the monks of the Slav monastery founded by Charles
IV, who, having immediately accepted communion in both
kinds, remained unmolested during the Hussite wars,
advised negotiations with Constantinople. The negotiator,
Constantinus Angelicus, probably a Greek, is entirely
unknown to us. The only reference to him is contained in
the letter which the Church of Constantinople addressed
(1452) "to the priests and princes of Bohemia," and Con-
stantinus seems to have had no credentials from Prague.
In this letter the Church of Constantinople expressed its
pleasure at hearing that the Bohemians were treading the
path of truth, and that they were opposed to the dangerous
innovations of Rome. Hope was expressed that through
the mediation of the Holy Gospel, the truest of all authori-
ties, the Bohemians would unite with "the Church of
Christ" (the Eastern Church). The letter further states
that though they (the Church of Constantinople) had
formerly believed that the Bohemians were opposed, not to
the innovations of Rome, but to the old traditions of the
Universal Church, they had now (through Constantinus
Angelicus) found that the Bohemians had returned to the
original Christian faith, and were anxiously seeking their
true mother-Church. The utraquist Consistory of Prague
answered (Sept. 29, 1452) by a letter which they addressed
to the Emperor Constantine Palaeologus, the Patriarch, and
to the whole Greek Church.^ In this letter the Consistory
expressed gratitude to God for having enlightened the minds
of the Bohemians, and shown them the way to return to the
primitive Church. In Bohemia — it continued — simony,
pride, and avarice are, unknown among the clergy, and all
the arts of Antichrist are detested by the people. " Even
when Antichrist, enraged against us, attacked us, burnt our

^ Both these letters are printed in full in Palacky's GeschichU von
Bohmen.

1 82 Bohemia

brethren, and sent out innumerable armies for our destruc-
tion, God Himself fought for us and drove the enemies
from our frontier." The letter concluded with an expression
of hope that the Eastern Church would continue to show
favour and love to Bohemia. The fall of Constantinople in
the following year (1453) put an end to these negotiations,
which may well be thought to have attracted too little
attention in our days.

The activity of theological speculation did not decrease
in Bohemia with the end of the Hussite wars. With the
possible exception of England at the time of the Common-
wealth, there never was a country where theology possessed
the all-absorbing interest that we notice in Bohemia at this
period. Numerous small sects sprang up which had mostly
only an ephemeral existence, and require no notice. The
foundation of the Church of the Bohemian Brethren, or
Moravians, which had already been alluded to, is an excep-
tion. This sect, which came into existence about this time,
gradually increased in importance, and at a later period —
the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seven-
teenth century — played a not inconsiderable part in
Bohemian history. The intellectual originator of the
"Unity" of the Bohemian Brethren, though he founded no
sect,^ was a layman of the name of Peter Chelcicky, as to
whom even the laborious researches of recent years have
yielded us little information. The year of his birth was
probably some time before the beginning of the fifteenth
century.^ As it is likely that his latest writings are not of
earlier date than the year 1443, he must have lived through
the whole stirring period of the Hussite wars. The horrors
of that time may have confirmed him in his most original
doctrine, the one most completely opposed to the spirit of
his age — that is, his belief in the absolute and unconditional
sinfulness of bloodshed.^ He shared with most reformers
of that period the desire to return to the primitive Church,

^ Palacky {Bbhniische Geschichte), Gindely {Geschzchte der Bohmis-
chen Briidei'), and more recently Dr. Jaroslav GoU {Qiiellen zur
Geschichte der Bohmischen Briider), have examined the conflicting
evidence as to the foundation of the " Unity." The last-named work is
to a great extent founded on unprinted documents in the archives of
Herrenhut, the present centre of the Moravian community.

2 Dr. Goll.

' Dr. Goll quotes a passage from one of his works in which he calls
Judas Macchabaeus " the Great Murderer."

An Historical Sketch 183

and, as did the Waldenses/ dated the beginning of the
ecclesiastical corruption from the — imaginary — donation of
the Emperor Constantine to Pope Sylvester. His views
with regard to the Sacrament of the Altar — the point on
which all religious controversy in Bohemia in the fifteenth
century turned — were opposed to those of the Taborites,
with whom he sympathized on some points. Chelcicky
denied that the tenets of the priests of Tabor on this subject
coincided with those of Wycliffe. He seems to have con-
sidered that the English divine, rather than Hus, was his
own teacher. Chelcicky believed himself in accord with
Wycliffe in maintaining the Real Presence of Christ in the
Sacrament.2

From the very scanty and contradictory notices ot
Chelcicky 's life, we learn that he made the acquaintance
of Rokycan, probably during the long period 1437-1448,
beginning in the reign of King Sigismund, when the
archbishop had absented himself from Prague. We are
told that they once met and conversed " on the men who
are called priests, and on the slight advantage they con-
ferred on men." 2 The archbishop seems to have been
impressed by the words of Chelcicky. After his return to
Prague (1448), Rokycan's preaching assumed a more
earnest and more impassioned tone. Grieved by the
reaction against Hussitism, which he feared would be the
consequence of the accession of King Ladislas, he returned
to the views of the earliest Bohemian reformers. He
proclaimed that true religion was extinct, and that the
influence of Antichrist showed itself even in the administra-
tion of the Holy Sacrament. Among Rokycan's hearers
was a young man known to us as Brother Gregory, who
was a nephew of the archbishop. He was deeply impressed
by his uncle's teaching, and appealed to him for spiritual
advice. The archbishop — preparing the way for events

^ The question whether the doctx-ines of Chelcicky and Brother
Gregory were derived from the Waldenses, and whether Waldensiail
priests consecrated the first priest of the " Unity," is one of the most
controverted points in Bohemian history. On the whole, evidence is
rather against the influence of the Waldenses on the foundation of the
"Unity," though there may have been a connection between the two
sects later.

2 GoU: "Peter Chelcicky und seine Lehre" (Pt. ii. of the Qtullen
zur Geschichte der Bohmischen Brilder).

2 Goll.

1 84

Bohemia

he afterwards regretted — lent him copies of several of
Chelcicky's writings. Gregory's enthusiasm became even
more inflamed, and he and his friends decided to entirely
withdraw from the corrupt world, and to retire into
solitude. Rokycan did not discourage this plan, though he
refused to join the enthusiasts. The archbishop indeed,
after the death of Ladislas (1457), became more moderate
in his tone, and assumed a more conciliatory attitude
towards the Roman Church. Rokycan, however, obtained
a refuge for Brother Gregory in^ the remote village of
Kunwald, near the small town of Zamberk.^ Gregory was
here joined by other pious men, among whom were
Michael, curate of Zamberk, and the priest Matthew. An
attempt to organize the new religious association was soon
made. Michael, who on insufficient evidence is said to
have been ordained by a Waldensian bishop, confirmed
the priest Matthew as head of the brotherhood, probably
after he had been chosen as such by the Brethren. The
most noticeable characteristics of the Union are, according
to Palack)^, first, that they attached more importance to the
practice of Christianity than to the Christian doctrine;
secondly, that piety and common-sense, with them, always
appeared as acting in accord,^ and thirdly, that the idea of
Church reform from the first occupied a prominent place in
their teaching. About the end of the fifteenth century
a division took place among the Brethren. Two parties,
known as the "Great" and the "Small" party, were
formed. As far as we can judge, the " Small " party, which
soon became extinct, maintained in its entirety the teaching
of Chelcicky, which included doctrines such as non-
resistance to evil-doers and, probably, a community of
goods founded on the example of the primitive Church.
The " Great " party, on the other hand, accommodated its
teaching to a certain extent to temporal ideas. Starting
from a very humble origin, the " Unity " was gradually
joined by men of all classes, even by members of the
Bohemian nobility. The " Great " party reconciled itself
with the world, and by partly abandoning its earliest
principles secured the future existence of the " Unity." ^

^ In German, " Senftenberg."

'^ This, of course, refers to the superstitious practices then so prevalent
in the Roman Church.
^ Goll.

i

An Historical Sketch 185

George of Podebrad did not long remain uncontested
Regent of Bohemia. Ulrich of Rosenberg and other lords
of the Austrian party, as well as the towns of Tabor and
Budejovice, had not been represented at the Diet which
conferred that dignity on George. In July (1452) we find
Podebrad again at war with his old antagonists. The
most interesting event in this petty campaign was the
capture of the town of Tabor, which, curiously enough, was
at last subdued by a utraquist, not by a Romanist, chief.
Podebrad treated the citizens graciously, but he forcibly
established the moderate utraquist (or Calixtine) church-
service in the town. The priest Venceslas Koranda, one
of the chiefs of the Taborites, was by order of Podebrad
imprisoned in the castle of Litice. After the capture of
Tabor, Podebrad besieged Ulrich of Rosenberg in one of
his castles, and forced that noble to capitulate. Ulrich and
his partisans now recognized Podebrad as regent. ^ In the
following year a new Diet met at Prague (in October), when
Ladislas was solemnly received as King of Bohemia. It
was declared, however — though not without some opposition
from the Austrian party — that Ladislas had been elected as
king only on the condition of his recognizing the privileges
of the country. Protracted negotiations to secure the
arrival in Bohemia and the coronation of the new king now
ensued. These negotiations at first took place at Vienna,^
but were at last brought to a favourable issue by an inter-
view between Podebrad and the Austrian guardians of the
young king which was held at Znoymo (1453). Ladislas
solemnly recognized all the privileges of Bohemia, including
the venerated Compacts. He also, being too young to
govern, confirmed the powers the Diet had conferred on
George of Podebrad. The king at last arrived in Bohemia
in October (1453), and on the 28th of that month was
crowned at Prague as King of Bohemia.

Very little need be said of the few years during which
Ladislas reigned over Bohemia. In consequence of the
strong administration of Podebrad, who at first was on

^ I have omitted the intervention of Podebrad in the internal
struggles in Austria, as of little direct influence on the events in
Bohemia.

^ According to Palacky, the young king was at first strongly opposed
to the religious views of the Bohemians; he even said, *'If the
Bohemians Hesire me for their king, let them be Christians and profess
the same faith as I do."
G 2

1 86 Bohemia

terms of great friendship with his youthful sovereign, the
country enjoyed comparative quiet. Podebrad succeeded
in inducing the young king to learn the Bohemian language,
but he seems to have retained a dislike to the people, which
was probably founded on the religious teaching which he
had received from his earliest preceptors. In January
(1456) Ladislas proceeded to Hungary. The danger
menacing Eastern Europe from the Turks, who in 1453
had taken Constantinople, and the wish to assert his
authority in a country which — though he was nominally
king — was in fact subject to the absolute control of John
Hunyady, were the probable motives of Ladislas. The
king returned to Bohemia in September of the following
year, and was enthusiastically received by the people.
" Archbishop Rokycan, at the head of his clergy, also met
the king, who received him with a stern countenance
and only returned his salute on Podebrad's admonition;
this conduct enraged many, but they suppressed their
indignation."

It had at this time been arranged to marry Ladislas to
Magdalen, daughter of Charles VII, King of France, and a
sumptuous Bohemian embassy set out for Paris to demand
the hand of the princess for their sovereign. ^ Only a few
weeks after their departure the king was attacked by a
singular illness, similar to, if not identical with, the Asiatic
plague, which in consequence of the war with Turkey had
at that time spread through Hungary to Bohemia, and even
further west. The king desired to see George of Podebrad,
of whom he took leave in touching words. He thanked him

* Barante {Histoire des Dues de Botirgogne, vol. v, pp. 92-95) gives
a detailed and very curious account, founded on contemporary French
records, of this embassy. Want of space unfortunately prevents me
from quoting largely from it. This writer enlarges on the curiosity
which the Bohemians aroused: " Ce qu'il y avait d'etrange dans leurs
coutumes etait un grand sujet de curiosite. C'etait dans le fort de
I'hiver, et ils allaient dans les rues en traineaux, ce qu'on n'avait jamais
vu ; ils avaient laisse dehors leurs chariots de bagage attaches par des
grosses chaines fermant a cadenas et chaque nuit ils faisaient coucher
dessus quelques-uns de leurs serviteuis malgre la rudesse du froid qui
etait extreme. Cela sembla singulier aux Parisiens." Barante speaks
of the quite unfounded accusation against Podebrad mentioned above,
which proves that it was soon and widely circulated. Ladislas, he
tells us, died suddenly, "empoisonne, disait on, par un seigneur nomme
Pozdziebracki, ou comme on disait en France Podiegrad qui fut elu
roi apres lui."

An Historical Sketch 187

for having been his faithful servant, told him he felt certain
that his own life was doomed, and begged Podebrad to pre-
serve peace and order among the people of Bohemia and
the dependent countries, and finally urged him to be just to
rich and poor alike.^ The king died on the third day of his
illness (Nov. 23, T457), not yet eighteen years of age. The
suddenness of the death of Ladislas gave rise to the totally
unfounded rumour that he had been poisoned by emissaries
of Podebrad. The national hatred to the Slav race caused
this accusation to be widely circulated in Germany, especially
at Vienna and at Breslau.^

According to the treaty of succession concluded between
Bohemia and Austria during the reign of the Emperor
Charles IV, the Emperor Frederick, as head of the house of
Habsburg, became the legitimate successor to the Bohemian
throne on the death of Ladislas. Two other members of
the same house, Albert, brother of Frederick — with whom
he lived in a state of constant enmity — and Sigismund, Duke
of Tyrol, also raised claims to the Bohemian crown ; as
likewise did William, Duke of Saxony, and Casimir, King of
Poland, who had both married sisters of Ladislas. Another
candidate who had no hereditary claims to rely on was
Prince Charles, younger son of King Charles VII of France,
who wished to secure the Bohemian crown for his son. The
decision of the Estates — formulated at the time of the
election of Ladislas — by which they had declared the
Bohemian crown to be elective de facto, justified all can-
didates in advancing their claims. The Diet which was to
elect the new king assembled at Prague on February 27,
1458, but unfortunately no detailed account of its proceed-
ings has reached us. We only learn that the ambassadors
sent by King Charles of France and Duke William of
Saxony were received, but that their attempts to influence
the election were fruitless. On March 2, George of Podebrad
was unanimously chosen as king by the Estates, even the
adherents of the Austrian party recording their votes in his
favour. The election was immediately announced to the

^ From a contemporary letter printed from the Jklunich archives by
Bachmann, Urkunden, etc.

2 Palacky, in a paper published by the Bohemian Learned Society in
1856, and fortified by the statements of medical authorities, clearly
proves the true nature of the illness of Ladislas, and consequently the
falsehood of the accusations against Podebrad.

1 88 Bohemia

people, by whom the news was enthusiastically received.
Podebrad appears to have been very certain of his election,
which the strong popular feeling in his favour indeed
rendered secure. It was generally felt that Bohemia must
at any cost be freed from the predominance of the Germans.
Rokycan, whose influence in the country was still great,
warmly supported the claims of Podebrad to the throne.
We read that he declared from the pulpit that it would be
better, "following the example of the judges of Israel, to
transform Bohemia into a republic, if there was no native
worthy of bearing the royal crown."

Moravia soon acknowledged King George, though there
was some opposition on the part of the towns, especially
those which, like Brno, contained a population largely
German, and devoted to the cause of Rome. Silesia also
submitted, though the opposition there was of a more serious
nature, and was promoted by the rejected candidate, Duke
William of Saxony. The town of Breslau, in particular
(where a fanatically Catholic and democratic faction had
obtained the government of the city), for some time resisted
the authority of King George.

During the first and more successful part of the reign of
King George, his foreign policy was entirely founded on the
close alliance he had concluded with Matthew Corvinus,
King of Hungary. Like George, Matthew had at the same
time and in a similar manner become ruler of his country;
for in Hungary, as in Bohemia, the legitimate claimant to
the throne was the Emperor Frederick, as head of the house
of Habsburg, to whom family treaties (already referred to)
secured the succession in both countries. It was through
the aid of his ally that King George overcame the diffi-
culties with regard to his coronation which were caused by
the anomalous ecclesiastical position in Bohemia. King
Matthew, with the consent of Cardinal Carvajal, then papal
legate in Hungary, sent the Bishop of Waitzen and Raab to
Prague, by whom King George was crowned (May 7, 1458).
Besides the usual coronation oath, the king had the day
before the ceremony taken another oath, by which he
pledged himself to obey the Church, to maintain its unity,
and to extirpate all sects and heresies in Bohemia. The
Compacts, and the right of using the chalice, were not
mentioned in this oath, and the Romanists subsequently
maintained that the king had thus renounced the special

An Historical Sketch 189

privileges of the Church of Bohemia. The king and the
utraquists naturally retorted that the Compacts which had
been sanctioned by the Council of Basel could by no means
be described as heresies, and that the coronation oath by
which the king had sworn to maintain the liberties and
privileges of Bohemia referred to the Compacts also. It is,
however, possible that the omission of all mention of the
Compacts was not an accidental one, but that it was a con-
cession to the representatives of the Papal See. Only thus
could King George hope to secure his coronation, a cere-
mony to which the people of Bohemia have always attached
the greatest importance.

The comparatively conciliatory Pope, Calixtus III, died
in the year of the accession of King George, and was
succeeded by Cardinal Piccolomini, known in literature as
Aenaeas Sylvius. The new Pope, who assumed the name
of Pius II, had a thorough knowledge of Bohemia, having
resided there while engaged on diplomatic missions, and he
has, as is well known, left us a history of the country. The
new Pope, however, became a bitter enemy to Bohemia and
to its king, as soon as he realized the impossibility of carry-
ing out his favourite plan, involving the suppression of the
Bohemian Compacts.

Germany was at that time greatly troubled by the enmity
which existed between the houses of Brandenburg and
Bavaria, while the power of the Emperor Frederick had
sunk so low that he was in constant dread of his immediate
subjects, the Estates of Lower Austria. King George
availed himself of this favourable political situation for the
purpose of extending his influence in Germany, where the
contending parties, and at times the Emperor also, sought
his alliance. It would extend our inquiries too far to give
an account of the means by which he strengthened his
position in Germany — more often by mediation than by
the force of arms — and of the treaties which he at this time
concluded with numerous German princes. We must, how-
ever, briefly refer to what was for a time the dominant
object of the king's policy, the acquisition of the German
crown. This plan is not easy to trace, for after its failure
all papers concerning it were destroyed. It was, in fact,
soon abandoned by the king, though not before it had given
rise to some of the disasters of the latter years of his reign.
In devising this scheme he acted largely under the influence

IQO Bohemia

of one of his councillors, Martin Mayer, who undoubtedly
displayed diplomatic capacity of the highest order. As far
as we can judge from the scanty evidence, Martin Mayer's
intention, approved of by King George, was not to dethrone
the Emperor Frederick III, but to place a " coadjutor " at
his side ; this " coadjutor " was to receive the title of King
of the Romans (or German King), such as had often been
conferred on the heirs of the Emperors. It seems that
Mayer had formerly suggested a similar plan to Philip,
Duke of Burgundy, who had declined the suggestion.
Mayer's proposal, however, met with greater favour from
King George of Bohemia. Serious negotiations ensued,
which, for the reason mentioned above, are now difficult to
trace. Mayer succeeded in obtaining the votes of the
Elector Palatine and of the Archbishop of Maintz for his
master. In February (1461) numerous German princes, on
the invitation of King George, assembled at Cheb for the
ostensible purpose of organizing a general armament against
the Turks. Probably through the ability of Mayer, this
object was made subservient to the purpose he had at heart.
The election of George as leader of the German forces
against the Turks, suggested by him, would almost neces-
sarily have secured for the king the position of ruler of
Germany. The king was also induced to favour this plan
of a campaign against the Turks by the consideration that
the energy of the fanatical Papists would thus be diverted
from the heretical Bohemians to the infidel Turks.

The complete failure of this scheme, which the king
abandoned almost as suddenly as he had entered on it,
was probably due to ecclesiastical influences. Pope Pius
strongly opposed it, and one of the adherents of King
George, the Archbishop of Maintz, had declared that he
would not vote for Podebrad's election as King of the
Romans before he had received the sacrament in the same
manner as all other Christian kings. On the other hand,
even the vague reports of these negotiations which spread
in Bohemia caused great dissatisfaction. The people began
to ask what had been the advantage of electing a Bohemian
as king, when he himself was now anxious to become a
German.

One of the consequences of the conciliatory attitude
towards Rome which his attempt to obtain the government
of Germany obliged King George to assume, was the

An Historical Sketch 191

persecution of the Bohemian Brethren, of which we read at
this period. The founder of the community of Kunwald,
Brother Gregory, was imprisoned by order of the king, and
even put to the rack (1461). These endeavours to con-
ciliate the Papal See, by attempting to suppress all sects
that went beyond the demarcations of the Compacts, were
entirely fruitless. The Roman Church had already decided
to revoke the concessions which Zizka's and Prokop's
victories had once forced it to make.

The successful policy of Podebrad — though his most
ambitious plan failed — had secured Bohemia against all
foreign enemies, and peace and order were also maintained.
The prosperity of the country had greatly increased in
consequence, and the people began to hope that the happy
times of King Charles IV were returning. The University
of Prague, which had suffered greatly during the troublous
times, now again entered into full activity.

King George was not, however, destined long to secure
quiet to his country. The ever-renewed religious struggle —
an inevitable consequence of the antagonistic position of
Bohemia with regard to the Western Church — now again
broke out more strongly. The Pope demanded an imme-
diate return to the exact ritual of the Western Church ; he
founded his demand on his interpretation of the king's oath
before his coronation, to which allusion has already been
made. Prolonged negotiations took place, in which King
George, who had dismissed Mayer, was very badly served
by his representatives. The king, seeing that a compromise
between the Pope and the people of Bohemia was impos-
sible, rallied firmly to the Compacts. In the month of
August (1452) he specially assembled the Estates for the
purpose of hearing the demands of the papal envoys, who
had arrived at Prague, and the king's answer to them.
The king made the memorable declaration that he would
to his death remain true to the communion in both kinds,
and that he was ready to risk his crown and his life for this
object.1

This was a direct declaration of war against Rome ; but

^ Palacky. According to a not very reliable letter of an unknown
diplomatic agent addressed to the German Electors (published by
Bachmann, Urkttnden, etc., from the Berlin archives), the king added
that he considered communion in both kinds necessary for the salvaiion
of the s-)ul. The king afterwards denied having said this.

192 Bohemia

Pope Pius II, who was then attempting to form a con-
federacy against the Ottoman power, did not immediately
take up the challenge. On his death (1464) his successor,
Paul II, prudently awaited a favourable moment for securing
his revenge on the King of Bohemia. He had not long to
wait. Many of the great Bohemian nobles had from the
first viewed with disatisfaction the elevation to the throne
of Podebrad, who was but their equal by birth. The king's
attitude, not always conciliatory, rendered this feeling still
stronger. Even the re-establishment of order and the
administration of justice by regular tribunals were by many
viewed with disfavour. The nobles of the Roman party
were the principal, though not the only, opponents of the
king; they declared themselves no longer bound by the
oath of allegiance which they had sworn to King George.

The malcontent nobles met at Zelena Hora (November
28, 1465), and formed an alliance against the king, whom
they accused of having violated the laws of the country,
especially with regard to taxation. Though the religious
question was not at first raised, the leaguers immediately
sent an emissary to the Pope, with the view of obtaining
his support. King George had, meanwhile, continued with
Pope Paul II the negotiations which had been entirely
broken off during the last years of Pius II. Though an
agreement seemed to all an impossibility, the king made a
last attempt towards that purpose. He addressed a letter
to Paul II, in which he offered great concessions. He
declared his readiness to accept a papist as Archbishop of
Prague if he were a Bohemian by birth, and if he were pre-
pared to ordain as priests those who communicated " sub
utraque," as well as those who communicated " sub una."
The king further suggested that all polemical preaching
should be forbidden on both sides, and even proposed —
a concession of no slight importance — to restore to the
Church the estates that had formerly belonged to it. No
ambassador, but a simple messenger carried the king's letter
to Rome. His reception, when he stated that he had to
deliver a letter sent by the King of Bohemia, quickly
demonstrated the impossibility of an agreement. The Pope
threw the letter on the floor, and addressed the messenger
in the strongest language. ^

^ It is curious to note the forcible expressions used by the Pope,
which it is perhaps better to leave in the original Latin : *' Quomodo

An Historical Sketch 193

The excommunication of King George, which had long
become inevitable, now took place (December 23, 1466),
with the usual formalities. Podebrad was deposed from his
rank as King of Bohemia ; all Catholics were forbidden to
obey him. The Pope declared that one of the leaders of
the League of Zelena Hora was to act as provisional
governor of Bohemia, till a new king could be chosen.

Hostilities between the king and the lords of the league
had meanwhile already commenced. The king had also to
defend himself against the attacks of the fanatical Catholics
of Breslau, as well as against the German population of
Lusatia. The German Emperor Frederick and King
Matthew of Hungary, George's former ally, also now joined
the king's enemies. The King of Hungary was, however,
forced by the ever-increasing danger of a Turkish invasion
to defer his projected attack on Bohemia. The desultory
fighting so usual at that period continued for some time in
Bohemian territory. Success on the whole favoured the
arms of King George, who (1467) even obliged the lords of
the league to conclude a truce, which, however, was of short
duration.

The king availed himself of the temporary respite from
domestic troubles for the purpose of carrying war into the
lands of his assailants. He (December 1467) attacked the
Emperor Frederick III in his hereditary territory. Lower
Austria; but he thus caused, or rather precipitated, a more
direct intervention of the King of Hungary into Bohemian
affairs. Recklessly abandoning his eastern frontiers to the
irreconcilable enemies of Christianity,^ King Matthew
decided that a campaign against the heretical Bohemians
was as meritorious as warfare against the Turks,^ He

es tu bestia audax in praesentia nostra nominare eum regem, quern scis
damnatum haereticum ab ecclesia Romana. Vadas ad furcas cum
iiaeretico ribaldo tuo."

1 Palacky says that if King Matthew had directed on the Turks the
whole efforts he fruitlessly made to extirpate the Bohemian utraquists,
he would very probably have crushed the Turkish power in Europe,
then still very feeble. The Turkish servitude which Hungary endured
for two centuries was to a great extent a consequence of the mistaken
policy of Matthew.

^ In a letter addressed to the magistrates of Cheb — preserved in the
archives of that town and printed by Bachmann, Urkundeti, etc. — the
King of Hungary declares "negotium arduum illud quidem" (the in-
vasion of Bohemia) "sed summi plane etiam in celo meriti et gloriae
super terram existimantes non minus pium hoc fore helium quamquod

194 Bohemia

issued a manifesto in which he proclaimed his intention
of defending the Catholic faith against the heretical
Bohemians.

War broke out early in the year 1468, and King Matthew
succeeded in obtaining possession of the greater part of
Moravia. He occupied the castle of Spielberg, the citadel
of the town of Brno, which he chose as his head-quarters.
From this strong fortress he made repeated raids in Eastern
Bohemia. On May 3, 1469, Matthew was proclaimed
King of Bohemia by his adherents. He distributed the
offices of State among his most powerful partisans the lords
of the league of Zelena Hora. Though Matthew obtained
many advantages in Moravia, which was the principal
scene of the hostilities, he was not able to secure a hold
on the entire country for any length of time; a renewed
invasion of Bohemia {1470) also had little result.

I'he danger threatening Bohemia from King Matthew^
destroyed the favourite plan of Podebrad, which he had
entertained during his whole life. He had always hoped
to secure the Bohemian crown for his descendants, and
thus to found a national dynasty. He was now forced to
abandon his favourite plan for the purpose of securing
the safety of his country. Attacked by numerous and
powerful enemies, he decided to obtain at any price the
alliance of the kindred Polish nation. He was successful
in this attempt, though only by sacrificing what had been
the great ambition of his life. He concluded a treaty with
Poland, by which the succession to the Bohemian throne
was — after his death — secured to Vladislav, son of Casimir,
King of Poland. This decision was shortly afterwards
ratified by the Estates of Bohemia, who recognized Prince
Vladislav as heir to the throne. ^

tanto jam tempore cum atrocissimis omnium fidelium hostibus Thurcis
gerimus."

^ The irritation of King George against the King of Hungary seems
to have been very great, and he provoked Matthew to single combat.
The curious correspondence between the two kings on this subject is
printed in Palacky's B'dhmische Geschichte.

2 The sons of King George, after the death of their father, assumed
the title of Dukes of Munsterberg, and shortly afterwards accepted the
Roman Catholic creed. They seem, however, to have venerated the
memory of their illustrious father, for we read that Duke Henry
of Munsterberg sent a message to the abbot of the convent of the
\irgin at Breslau, informing him that he would burn all his villages
if he did not deliver his father from hell. This referred to the

An Historical Sketch 195

In the latter part of the year 1470 the Bohemian arms
were more successful. King George drove the Hungarians
almost completely out of Moravia, though they continued
to occupy a few towns. He also succeeded in subduing
the lords of the Zelena Hora League, and matters seemed
to be assuming a more favourable aspect when King
George, who had long been suffering from dropsy, died
(March 22, 1471). Just a month before (February 22) John
of Rokycan, the first and last archbishop of the utraquist
Church, w^hich he governed for nearly half-a-century, had
also expired.

King George has always remained, next to Charles IV,
the sovereign whose memory the Bohemians treasure most.^
Even the misfortunes of the last years of his reign, and
the failure of his principal plans — supremacy in Germany,
and the foundation of a national dynasty — do not diminish
this feeling. It , is indeed possible that, had he suc-
ceeded in obtaining the prominent position in the Empire
which his ambition marked out him, the affection of the
Bohemians would have been alienated ; for it was the
knowledge that they were governed by a man of their
own race that mainly induced the Bohemians to love
Podebrad and to retain their affection for him even when
his fortunes were at the lowest. Though the Estates had
already recognized Prince Vladislav of Poland as heir to
the throne, his claim was immediately disputed by King
Matthew of Hungary, whom his adherents had already
proclaimed King of Bohemia. Matthew still held several
towns in Moravia, while the whole of Lusatia and large
districts of Silesia — specially the fanatical citizens of Breslau
— acknowledged him as their sovereign. It is probable
that the wish of the Estates to establish the purely elective
character of the royalty of the country, caused them to
ignore their former decision and determine to elect a

fact that the abbot had built a new chapel, for which he had caused
a picture to be painted representing the Last Judgment. In this
picture King George was represented as being carried to hell on
a litter by two devils. The abbot immediately caused the picture
of the king to be effaced, fearing that his villages might be burnt.
(Eschenloer. )

^ It has been impossible to give more than a mere outline of the
eventful reign of King George. Palacky, with whom he is a great
favourite, has given a long and perhaps slightly idealized portrait of
the KiniT.

196

Bohemia

new king. The diet assembled at Kutna Hora, where
prolonged debates took place. Besides the Hungarian
and PoHsh princes, Duke Albert of Saxony — who appears
to have been supported by the sons of the late King
George — also found adherents. It was, however, at last
decided to elect as king Prince Vladislav of Poland (May
27, 147 1 ). The new king immediately proceeded to
Bohemia, and arrived at Prague (August 19), where he
was received with rejoicings by the citizens. The doctors
of the university, who welcomed him in the old town,
"presented him with a neatly-printed and bound copy
of the Bible, so that he might read it and direct himself
and his subjects according to t^je will of God.'' The
king's coronation took place three days later, but con-
temporary records do not report much concerning the
ceremonies of the occasion.

King Matthew of Hungary recommenced hostilities
against Bohemia as soon as his hopes of becoming the
lawful sovereign of the land vanished. War between the
two kings continued up to the year 1478. We read of no
great battles, though constant local engagements occurred
between the towns and the castles that acknowledged
Vladislav and those which sided with Matthew. A treaty
of peace was at last concluded at Olomonc in 1478.
Matthew renounced all claims on Bohemia, but retained
possession of Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia ; these countries
were, however, to return to the Bohemian crown on the
death of King Matthew.

The internal religious struggle in Bohemia meanwhile
continued. It is clear that the sympathies of King
Vladislav II ^ were entirely with the papal party, and that
policy alone prevented him from more openly manifesting
them. Among other measures favourable to the Roman
Catholics, Vladislav appointed as magistrates for Prague
men of the party vv^hich, though still adhering to the use of
the chalice, opposed all the other tenets of the old reform
party, and generally showed sympathy with the papists. By
order of these magistrates several priests and others were
imprisoned for expressing opinions contrary to the doctrine
of the Roman Church. This incident and other similar
ones, which took place principally on the estates of the

^ Vladislav was thus designated, as the Bohemian Prince Vladislav
(1410-1473) had borne the title of king.

An Historical Sketch 197

great nobles of the papal party, caused the utraquists to
unite for self-defence. The utraquist nobles and knights
formed a confederacy for mutual aid, of which the high
burgrave, John Tovacovsky, Lord of Cimburg, became the
leader. The arbitrary conduct of the magistrates of Prague
soon caused troubles in that town. The people, incensed
by the rumoured intention of the magistrates to imprison or
execute the leaders of the utraquist party, stormed the
three town halls and murdered several of the magis-
trates. Great disorder prevailed in the town, and a large
number of Germans and Jews were massacred. The king
was naturally greatly incensed, but he was unable to cope
with a party to which the great majority of the people of
Bohemia belonged ; he was even unable to punish the
persons guilty of these murders. In 1485 one of the many
temporary compromises between the Roman and utraquist
parties was concluded at Kutna Hora, and peace, or rather
a truce, was thus obtained. Both parties undertook to
respect the religious views of their opponents, by abstaining
from all insults to their creed. The compacts were again
confirmed, and it was decided that each creed should retain
the use of the churches which it had possessed at the
beginning of the reign of Vladislav II ; a certain amount of
religious liberty was also granted to the peasants whose
faith differed from that of the lords on whose estates they
lived.

A few years afterwards (in 1493) another attempt was
made to reconcile the utraquists with the Roman Church,
of which Alexander VI (Borgia) was then the head. An
Italian noble, Nicholas Cola de Castro, who frequently
journeyed to Prague, assumed spontaneously the office of
mediator. He assured the citizens of Prague of the Pope's
good-will, and obtained a letter from the magistrates of the
town, in which in respectful language, but in a very indefi-
nite manner, they asked the Pope for his favour. The Pope
also answered in vague words. He expressed the hope
" that the pious and sincere Catholic King Vladislav would
lead them on the true path of faith and humility." The
Pope said that he would " gladly receive every one whose
thoughts were true and upright, and that he would be a
father to all such." The Pope appears to have been entirely
misled by Cola de Castro, for on appointing Bishop Urso
Orsini papal legate for Bohemia, he informed him that the

198

Bohemia

obstinate heretics had at last seen their errors. When the
Diet that met at Prague (December 20, 1494) declared
that the Compacts were to form the basis for the future
negotiations, the proposed reconciliation immediately fell
to the ground. The papal envoy never even started for
Bohemia.^ At a later period of his pontificate Pope
Alexander VI greatly irritated the utraquists by appointing
a Dominican friar "censor " over all books printed and sold
in Bohemia and Moravia. The friar had orders to burn all
those containing heretical views of which he could obtain
possession. The Dominican established himself at Olomonc
— always a stronghold of the Catholic party — and published
several polemical works in which he violently attacked the
utraquist creed.

The most important feature of the reign of King Vladislav
is the development of the constitution of Bohemia in an
aristocratic, or rather oligarchic, direction. All the enact-
ments of the Diets of this reign rendered the peasantry
more completely dependent on their territorial lords, and
encroached on the privileges of the towns. The power of
the crown — very strong under King George — also decreased
during the reigns of Vladislav II and Louis.

The oldest institutions of Bohemia — as far as we can
judge from the scanty records — were of a democratic
character, as indeed were those of most Slavonic countries.
Slaves and serfs were unknown. Through the constant
contact with Germany feudal institutions were slowly intro-
duced into Bohemia, and the peasants gradually became
more dependent on the nobles. Still, this was not so
entirely the case as in Germany, and the armed peasants, at
whose head Zizka and Prokop defeated the armies of half
Europe, were still freemen.

The reaction against democracy in Europe at this time
found expression in Bohemia also. The Diet of 1487 at
last practically established bondage. It issued an enact-
ment, according to which all were forbidden to give shelter
to servants or peasants who might have left the estates on
which they lived ; they were, on the contrary, to be returned
immediately — under penalty of a fine — to the owner of the
estate from which they had fled.

This measure was destined to have the most fatal results
for the independence of Bohemia. The stout Bohemian
1 Palacky.

An Historical Sketch 199

peasantry lost its former interest in its nation and gradually
became indifferent to the independence of Bohemia.

The dissensions between the towns and the nobility,
which were renewed at almost every Diet during the reigu
of King Vladislav, at first turned principally on a conflict of
material interests. The towns had hitherto enjoyed almost
a monopoly of the trade of brewing, at all times one of the
most lucrative undertakings in Bohemia. Many of the
great nobles at this period established breweries, and forbade
the sale of other beer on their extensive estates, thus greatly
injuring the towns.

During these struggles King Vladislav acted mainly under
the influence of Duke Bartholemew of Miinsterberg, a
grandson of King George. Under this influence, the king
— as far as it was in his power — sided with the townsmen,
and endeavoured to resist the increasing preponderance of
the nobles. The weak and vacillating nature of the king,
however, rendered him unable to take a prominent part in
a great constitutional struggle. During the whole reign of
Vladislav, the nobles pursued their policy, which strove for
the reduction of the rights of the townsmen. All the
decisions of the Diet during this reign give proof of this
tendency.

The Diet attempted to impose considerable limitations
on the right of the towns (as the " third curia ") to take part
in its deliberations, and also to curtail the privileges of
special jurisdiction which the towns had for many years
enjoyed. All these innovations were formally promulgated
by being included in the regulation of King Vladislav,
a codification of the various enactments of the previous
years. This code (published in 1500) enumerated all the
privileges of the knights and nobles, while entirely ignoring
those of the towns. Its fundamental principle was that
only nobles and knights were freemen, and that the other
classes of the population were destined to servitude. These
therefore had no innate rights, but could only enjoy such as
were granted to them by favour.^ The towns appealed to
King Vladislav, who was, however, unable to oppose the
nobles. He therefore reluctantly decided in favour of the
new regulations, and duly ratified them. After this several
Diets composed only of the nobles and knights were held,
and the disputes between the different orders continued to
1 Palacky.

200 Bohemia

the end of the reign of Vladislav, for a time throwing even
the religious dissensions into the shade.

Vladislav had shortly after the death of King Matthew
(1490) been elected King of Hungary, and it was in that
country that he spent the greater part of the later years of
his reign. Constant absence from Bohemia greatly reduced
the king's influence, and, as previously mentioned, he was
quite unable to resist the encroachments of the nobles.

King Vladislav died at Ofen in Hungary on March 1 3,
1 5 16. He was succeeded by Louis, his son by his marriage
to Anna de Candale, a connection of the French royal
family. 1 Louis, who had already been crowned as King of
Bohemia at the age of three, was only ten years old at the
death of his father. Shortly before his death, Vladislav had
made an agreement with his brother. King Sigismund of
Poland, and with the German Emperor Maximilian (who
had succeeded his father, Frederick IK), by which they
were declared guardians of his son Louis, should he come
to the throne before he was of age. At the same time mar-
riages were arranged between King Louis and the Arch-
duchess Mary, grand-daughter of the Emperor, and also
between the Archduke Ferdinand, grandson of the Emperor,
and Anna, daughter of King Vladislav. It was at the same
time agreed that the Bohemian crown should pass to the
descendants of Princess Anna, should King Louis die
childless. This agreement was, however, not brought before
the Estates of Bohemia, and their assent was not demanded.
On the death of Vladislav the Diet recognized the German
Emperor and the King of Poland as guardians of the young
king, but it would not allow them any right of interference
in the government of the land. The Bohemian nobles, who
held the great offices of State, especially the supreme bur-
grave, Zdenek Lev, Lord of Rozmittal, governed the country
almost without control. At the beginning of the reign of
the new king the disputes between the orders were for a
time made up by an agreement, which is known as the
Treaty of Venceslas (1517).^ By this agreement the towns
renounced their claim to an exclusive right of brewing, and

^ She was the daughter of Gaston de Candale and Catharine, Coun-
tess de Foix. Her grandmother was a sister of King Louis XII of
France, at whose court she had been brought up,

* Because the Diet which voted this agreement met on the day of
St Venceslas (September 28).

An Historical Sketch 201

the nobility recognized their special privileges of jurisdic-
tion. Before this time the representatives of the towns had
already been again admitted to the sittings of the Diet

The extension of Luther's teaching in Bohemia, which
began about this period, revived the religious strife, which
had lately decreased. The new doctrine found adherents
among the utraquists, many of whom considered that the
compacts did not go far enough in the cause of Church
reform. The Germans, who had hitherto been the most
strenuous opponents of this reform, now accepted the
teaching of Luther in great numbers. "The Bohemians
were surprised to see the Germans now themselves receive
communion in the two kinds, and renounce the authority of
the Roman Church." ^

In 1522 King Louis, who had up to that date resided in
Hungary, where he had also been accepted as king, arrived
in Bohemia. The tyranny and defraudations of Zdenek
Lev of Rozmital had caused great dissatisfaction in Bohemia,
and joy was great when the king, shortly after his arrival in
Bohemia, dismissed him from his office of supreme burgrave.
The king thus attempted to reassert the royal prerogative
which had recently fallen almost into oblivion. John of
Wartenberg, a weak man, became burgrave, and the king
appointed as regent Duke Charles of Miinsterberg, a grand-
son of King George. Duke Charles, whom after the death
of his cousin, Duke Bartholomew, King Vladislas had often
consulted on the affairs of the State, was intellectually far
inferior to his cousin, and quite unequal to his difficult
task.2 He and the burgrave and other officials of the new
government appear to have favoured the more advanced
utraquists, who were then meditating a union with the
Lutherans of Germany. The new officials thus fell into
disfavour with the king, who at that moment was parti-

1 Public opinion at that period so completely identified the Bohe-
mians with the idea of heresy, that Luther himself was " accused " of
being a Bohemian. In a letter to Count Schlick, a Bohemian noble,
Luther says : '* Odium nominis vestri nullus vestrum tanto onere, quanto
ego, unquam portauit, Quoties rogo Bohemus natus quoties fugnm
molitus ad Bohemos, adhnc hodie criminor?"

^ 2 The late Professor Rezek, in an interesting article published in the
Casopis Musea Kralovst-ui Ceskeho (Journal of the Museum of the
Bohemian Kingdom), deals with the formerly little known relations ot
the dukes of Miinsterberg to Kings Vladislav and Louis.

202 Bohemia

cularly anxious to ingratiate himself with the Papal See.
He had just requested financial aid from Rome for the
purpose of defending Hungary against the Turks. Lev of
Rozmital was therefore reinstated as burgrave, but he did
not forgive the king for his former dismissal. Shortly after
he had resumed office, Rozmital became involved in a feud
with the powerful Rosenberg family, as he claimed the
inheritance of Lord Peter of Rosenberg. All the Bohemian
nobles and towns took sides in this feud, and the whole
country was divided into the Rosenberg and the Rozmital
factions.

It was at this unpropitious moment that the unfortunate
King Louis, then again residing in Hungary, sent an urgent
demand for aid against the Turks. When the Diet, before
which the matter was brought, met, no agreement could be
arrived at. Rozmital in particular showed little zeal for the
cause of the king. The heads of the Rosenberg party at
last resolved, at their own expense, to equip a force in aid
of King Louis. Rozmital thereupon also decided to send a
small army to Hungary. The Bohemians had been so tardy
in their preparations that only a few of their troops — those
sent by the lords of the Rosenberg Confederacy — had
arrived when the battle of Mohac took place (August 29,
1526). That fatal battle, in consequence of which the
greater part of Hungary became a Turkish province for
more than two centuries, belongs to Hungarian rather than
to Bohemian history. It is sufficient to say that King
Louis foolhardily attacked the Turkish army of 300,000 men
with a force of only 25,000, and was totally defeated.
"When leaving the battle-field the king — who was then only
twenty years of age — was drowned while trying to ford a
marshy stream.

CHAPTER VII

THE KINGS OF THE HOUSE OF HABSBURG FROM THE BATTLE
OF M0Ha6 to THE BATTLE OF THE WHITE MOUNTAIN
(1526-1620)

"After the unfortunate battle and the death of King
Louis at Mohac, the lands of the Bohemian crown became
subject to an interregnum. This was the more unfortunate,
as under the feeble rule of the two last kings anarchy and

An Historical Sketch 203

lawlessness had already been prevalent, and had endangered
the welfare of the people. All the native contemporary
sources unite in telling us of the hopeless moral decay and
the internal ruin of the Bohemian State, both with regard to
ecclesiastical and political affairs." ^

But neither the precarious condition of the country nor
the claims of the Archduke Ferdinand (founded as they
were on the treaty between the late King Vladislav and the
Emperor Maximilian) discouraged numerous competitors for
the vacant throne. Almost immediately after the news of
the death of the king reached Prague (September 9), it was
rumoured that many princes aspired to the crown of Bohe-
mia. Besides the Archduke Ferdinand we find among them
the Bavarian Dukes Louis and William, Sigismund King of
Poland, John Elector of Saxony and his son John Frederick,
and George Duke of Saxony. Francis I, King of France,
Joachim Margrave of Brandenburg, Duke Frederick of Leig-
nitz, and the noblemen Charles Duke of Miinsterberg,
Zdenek Lev Lord of Rozmital, and Adalbert Lord of Pern-
stein, were also mentioned as candidates. There appear to
have been two parties among the Estates, whose duty it was
now to elect a king and establish a new dynasty in Bohemia.
The adherents of one party were strongly opposed to the
choice of a Bohemian noble, as they objected to a king who
was their equal by birth. The other party, on the contrary,
declared that no one should be chosen who was ignorant
of the BohemianJ.^guage, and it was urged that if a man
capable "oFruIing strongly could be found, it would be of
minor importance if he were poor, as the country was rich
enough to allow its sovereign the means of sustaining the
regal dignity."^ This probably referred to Lev of Rozmital,
who was the most prominent of the Bohemian candidates
to the throne, and whose financial circumstances at that
time were very unsatisfactory. Archduke Ferdinand at first
aimed rather at his recognition as King of Bohemia — in
virtue of his relationship to the late king, and of the agree-
ments mentioned above — than at his election. The Bohe-
mian nobles were, however, immovable in their determina-
tion to maintain the_^ectiye__character of the Bohemian
crown. Ferdinand lost no time in~~sending his representa-
tives to Bohemia, and they were soon followed by envoys of

^ A. Rezek, Geschichte der Regierung Ferdinands I in Bohmen.
2 Rezek.

204 Bohemia

the other candidates. When the moment of the election
approached many of the competitors withdrew their claims.
Among others, the agents of the Kings of France and
Poland abandoned all pretensions put forward on the part
of their sovereigns, though the representative of King Sigis-
mund of Poland had at first made great promises to the
Bohemians, to induce them to elect his master. The general
opinion in Bohemia had already made itself clearly felt, that
the remoteness of these countries rendered the election of
either of the princes impossible. After the beginning of
October only two candidatures were persisted in, and the
two opposing parties resolved themselves into the Austrian
and the Bavarian factions. The other candidates either
altogether abandoned the contest, or joined one or the
other of these parties. On the Bavarian side we find the
Kings of France and of Poland, Adalbert of Pernstein, and
Lev of Rozmital. Pope Clement VII, always an enemy of
the house of Habsburg, also brought all his influence to
bear in favour of the Bavarian candidate. On Ferdinand's
side we only find Duke George of Saxony, and Ferdinand's
sister, the widowed Queen Maria, also used what little influ-
ence she had in his favour. The ambassadors of Ferdinand,
however, displayed great energy, and bribery played a great
part in this election. Lev of Rozmital was won over to the
archduke by the promise of payment of his debts — which
amounted to 50,000 florins — and by the assurance that
those who had not from the first belonged to the Austrian
party should in no way suffer for their former opposition,
but should retain all their offices and privileges. Similar
promises gained over other of the great nobles, and the
agents of the house of Habsburg acted with so much
secrecy that the Bavarian envoys were still hopeful when
the election of Ferdinand was practically assured. On
October 23, 1526, the Diet elected the Archduke Ferdinand
King of Bohemia. This date marks the beginning of the
rule of the house of Habsburg over Bohemia, if we except
the short reigns of Rudolph and of Albert, who had also
belonged to that dynasty.

Ferdinand was also chosen king by the Hungarians, and
he had already become possessed of the hereditary domains
of the house of Habsburg. The government of Germany
w^as also entrusted to him whenever his brother, the
Emperor Charles V, was in Spain or in the Netherlands.

An Historical Sketch 205

Many of the events of his life, therefore, do not belong to
Bohemian history, and the greater part of his time, particu-
larly during the last years of his reign, were spent away
from Bohemia.

In matters of theological controversy, which then and for
many years afterwards absorbed the whole intellectual
activity of Bohemia, P'erdinand showed greater moderation
than his Spanish education had led the Bohemians to expect.
Thoroughly grasping the intricate state of ecclesiastical
affairs in Bohemia, the king from the first realized that the
abolition of all " heresies " and the complete re-establish-
ment of the Roman creed and ritual were for the present
not to be sought for. He therefore attempted to establish
an aUiance between the few Romanists in Bohemia and
those utraquists who, though strictly maintaining the com-
pacts of Basel, had little sympathy with the ideas of Church
[reform and of Protestantism which at that moment were
'spreading rapidly through the neighbouring German coun-
tries. The position of the moderate party in the utraquist
community was, however, one of steady decadence. The
king was therefore, in the concluding years of his reign,
obliged to rely principally on the Catholics, and he used all
his influence in the country in their favour. Whenever cir-
cumstances permitted, Ferdinand — whose time was princi-
pally taken up by the defence of Hungary against the Turks
— attempted the difficult task of uniting the Romanists and
utraquists, hoping thus to prevent the spread of Lutheran-
ism. Ferdinand and his advisers maintained that as the
Council of Basel had only recognized the utraquist com-
munity, that community and the Romanists alone were
entitled to a legal status : the Protestants and Bohemian
Brethren should therefore, they argued, be absolutely ex-
cluded from the country. In 1537 Ferdinand arranged a
meeting between the representatives of the Roman and
those of the utraquist parties. He declared that only those
who either professed the Catholic faith or recognized the
compacts had a right to be present. The utraquists forced
several members of the community of the Brethren to retire,
but they opposed the wishes of the king with regard to the
Lutherans. Several of the utraquist nobles even spoke in a
disparaging way of the compacts, saying that they had
never read them, and that they would only be guided by
the word of God. The utraquist party then proposed a

2o6 Bohemia

compromise to the Catholics which cannot be called unfair ;
for of the four creeds that then divided Bohemia, the Old-
Utraquists, the Lutherans, the Bohemian Brethren, and the
Romanists, the last-named had the fewest adherents.^

These proposals were drawn up in seven articles. Accord-
ing to them, papal and utraquist priests were henceforth
freely to celebrate divine service in the churches of either
confession ; the Romanists were to be allowed to embrace
the utraquist faith without hindrance, and vice versa;
Catholic lords were not to appoint priests to a utraquist
parish without the approval of the authorities of the utraquist
Church ; on the other hand, utraquist patrons of livings
where the population was Catholic were not to make any
similar appointments without the consent of the Roman
Church. It was further proposed that there should be two
bishops for Bohemia, one for the utraquist, the other for
the Romanist part of the population. It was finally declared
that utraquist lords should have equal rights to the offices
of State with the Catholics. The Romanists refused these
proposals, which would practically have established religious
equality between the two creeds. The age was perhaps not
ripe for such a settlement, and from a strictly Romanist
point of view it was impossible to approve of the equality of
position which the " heretics " would thus have obtained.
Henceforth the utraquist Church became more and more
Lutheran in its doctrine and ritual, and almost abandoned
the Compacts, which no longer sufficiently represented its
religious views.

Though he was unsuccessful in his efforts to prevent the
spread of Protestantism in Bohemia, Ferdinand succeeded
in consolidating his dynasty, and in strengthening the royal
authority in Bohemia. He was able to obtain from the

* The number oi the adherents of the Church of Rome during the
sixteenth century is a very contested point. Dr. Gindely {Geschichte
der Ertheitung des Bohmischen Alajestdts brief es), counting together
Bohemia and Moravia, where the Koman Church never completely lost
its power, estimates them as a third of the population. This figure
is certainly too high. Gindely himself, speaking of the last years
of the sixteenth century, says that Catholicism was constantly losing
ground, and would then have been extinct had it not been for the
Jesuits. The Venetian ambassador, Giovanni Michiel (writing in
1576), speaks of ** questi pochi catholici che ci sono" (in Bohemia);
he adds, however, " che sono pero li maggior signori ed officiali del
regno " (from the State Archives at Venice).

An Historical Sketch 207

Estates the recognition of his hereditary right to the throne.
At the moment of his accession he had been obliged to
recognize the elective character of the Bohemian crown.
When a great fire at Prague (1541) destroyed all the State
documents, Ferdinand obtained the consent of the Estates
to the substitution of a charter formulating the theory that
he had, in consequence of the hereditary rights of his wife.
Queen Anna, been accepted as king in the place of the
former charter, which had declared that he had become
king by election. This innovation, however, caused great
dissatisfaction in Bohemia.

In the year 1545 King Ferdinand, by the Peace of
Constantinople, put at least a temporary stop to the war with
Turkey, which had continued almost uninterruptedly since
the beginning of his reign. His brother, the Emperor
Charles V, had in the previous year concluded peace with
France. The Emperor now attempted to stem the tide of
Lutheranism, which had risen very high in consequence of
his inability to devote his attention to German internal
affairs during the prolonged war with France. Hostilities
broke out in Germany in the summer of 1546 between the
Emperor Charles V and the Protestant princes ; the latter
had met at Schmalkalden and formed a league, the leaders
of which were John Frederick, Elector of Saxony, and Philip,
Landgrave of Hesse. Ferdinand undertook to aid his
brother by attacking the lands of the Elector of Saxony from
the adjoining districts of Bohemia. The Estates of Bohemia,
the great majority of w^hich were either old-utraquists,
Lutherans, or members of the union of the Bohemian
Brethren, were naturally opposed to the Church of Rome.
They were therefore now in a very difficult position. There
was little doubt that by aiding King Ferdinand and the
Emperor in their attempt to suppress Protestantism in
Germany they would greatly increase the power of their
king ; in case of success there was every probability that
Ferdinand would abandon his former moderation, and
strive forcibly to re-establish the Church of Rome in
Bohemia. On the other hand, many were unwilling to'rise
in arms against their "elected and crowned" king, while the
old dislike to the Germans rendered an alliance with the
Elector of Saxony distasteful to others. The Estates there-
fore adopted an undecided and vacillating policy — with the
results that such a policy almost invariably produces.

2o8 Bohemia

King Ferdinand assembled the Estates at Prague (July
1546), and obtained their consent to a general armament of
the country should it be attacked by the Turks or other
foreign enemies. Soon afterwards, the army of Ferdinand
marched into Saxony to attack the Elector. When they
reached the Saxon frontier Ferdinand's Bohemian troops
refused to cross it, grounding their refusal on the decision
of the Diet. In the following year (1547) hostilities re-
commenced in Germany between the Protestant princes and
the Emperor Charles V, with whom Duke Maurice of
Saxony had entered into an alliance against the head of his
house. Not discouraged by the experiences of the previous
year, Ferdinand again called on the Estates of Bohemia to aid
him. By an order issued at Prague (January 12, 1547), he
summoned them to join him with their forces the following
month. Only a few Romanists and old-utraquists assembled
there. The majority of the people thought the moment
favourable for forcing Ferdinand to recede from the more
authoritative attitude he had lately assumed, both as regards
temporal and ecclesiastical affairs. The citizens of Prague
took the lead in this movement, and were soon joined by
many nobles and knights. They demanded that a Diet
should be summoned, and the Estates met at Prague on
March 18, without waiting for the king's assent. They here
formulated their demands in fifty-seven "articles." These
articles, among other matters, re-established the elective
character of the Bohemian crown, proclaimed liberty for all
religious beliefs in Bohemia, and in various points curtailed
the rights of the sovereign.

A committee, consisting of four members of each of the
three Estates, was elected. No direct attack on the king
was, however, attempted. It seems, indeed, rather to have
been the intention of the Estates to reduce the power of
the king to what it had been at the beginning of his reign.
It is noticeable that of the eight members of the new
committee chosen from the nobles and knights, four were
members of the Unity of the Bohemian Brethren.

The Elector of Saxony, who greatly overrated the chance
of receiving aid from the Bohemians, entered into
negotiations with the Estates. The latter now decided to
equip an armed force, the command of which they gave to
Kaspar Pflug of Rahstein ; his instructions were to proceed
to the Saxon frontier and there to await further orders. The

An Historical Sketch 209

Estate, however, continued to be irresolute till the moment
when action was possible had passed. Rabstein marched to
Joachimsthal, close to the Saxon frontier, but he refused to
cross into Germany, where critical events were impending,
without a formal order from the Estates. Soon afterwards^
the decisive victory of Charles V at Miihlberg (April 14, 1547)
for the time crushed Protestantism in Germany. The
Bohemian troops dispersed, and the Estates, with foolish and
untimely servility, sent a deputation to Ferdinand to
congratulate him on the victory. Ferdinand on this occasion
displayed his usual prudence. Charles V had after his
victory placed a large force of Spanish and Walloon soldiers
at his brother's disposal. The opportunity of asserting
absolute authority in Bohemia was certainly a tempting one.
Ferdinand was, however, not induced by the weakness and
irresolution which the Estates had shown to underrate the
danger of a new general uprising of the Bohemian nation,
should that still warlike race be driven to desperation. He
therefore gave a gracious though evasive answer to the
deputation ; but he demanded a promise that the Estates
would abandon all negotiations with the Protestant princes
of Germany. Ferdinand then marched on Prague with the
forces the Emperor had put at his disposal. The town
capitulated (July 8, 1547) almost without any show of
resistance. Ferdinand took this opportunity for seriously
curtailing the autonomy of the Bohemian towns, which had
already been weakened through the acts of the Diets during
the reign of King Louis. When accepting the uncondi-
tional surrender of the town of Prague, Ferdinand informed
the citizens that their former privileges would only be renewed
after he had examined them. The result of this examination
was that all the enactments contained in the privileges of
Prague and the other Bohemian towns which in any way
impaired the royal authority were annulled. To enforce this
change the king appointed " royal judges," as they were
called, who were to exercise a general control over the
municipalities of the provincial towns of Bohemia ; without
their consent neither an assembly of the town council nor of
the general body of the citizens could take place : they also
had a right of veto on any decision which seemed to them
to encroach on the royal prerogative. Officials of higher
ranks but with similar functions were also appointed for the
city of Prague, where they received the name of "royal

H

2IO Bohemia

captains." Punishment was also meted out to many
individuals who had taken a prominent part in the ill-
considered and fruitless attempt to resist the royal authority.
Some of those most implicated, among whom was Pflug of
Rabstein, had fled the country, but four of the leaders of the
movement, two knights and two citizens of Prague, were
decapitated in the square on the Hradcany (August 20).
As the king had summoned the Diet on the day appointed
for the execution, the assembly afterwards became known as
the "Bloody Diet." Numerous landed estates were also
confiscated.

King Ferdinand undoubtedly gave proof of his usual
sagacity when he attributed the insurrection in Bohemia
largely to the religious sects. One of these, the " Unity "
of the Bohemian Brethren, though of humble origin, had by
this time spread widely, and acquired great influence in the
land. The Unity was from the first of a very democratic"
character ; it had, however, been joined by a certain
number of nobles, and these were among the most promi-
nent opponents of Ferdinand's plan of subduing the German
Protestants with the aid of Bohemian arms. It was at this
body, therefore, that Ferdinand aimed the sharpest blow.
On October 8, 1547, he issued a decree re-enacting laws
formerly directed against the Brethren. He forbad their
religious meetings, and ordered them to make restitution to
the Catholics or utraquists of the churches of which they
had taken possession. At the same time the estates of
several nobles who belonged to the Unity were confiscated ;
many of the Brethren were imprisoned, and others driven
out of the country. The crudest fate befell Augusta, the
leader or bishop of the Unity. He was unjustly accused ^
of having had secret communications with the Elector of
Saxony, and was for some time confined in the "White
Tower " at Prague. He was there subjected to torture in a
manner that even at that barbarous period appeared excep-
tionally horrible. It was hoped that he would thus be
induced to confess his treason. When it was found that
this was impossible, he was thrown into the dungeon of the

1 Dr. Gindely {Geschickte de?- Bdhmischen Brilder) admits the inno-
cence of Augusta, but he attempts to prove that the Lutherans who
were involve! in the supposed conspiracy tried to obtain their own
security by throwing the responsibility on Augusta and other leaders of
the Unity.

An Historical Sketch 211

royal castle of Piirglitz, where he remained a prisoner for
sixteen years. Some years later, Ferdinand, during one of
his visits to Bohemia, established the order of the Jesuits in
the land (1556). It has been truly stated by writers of the
most opposite views that this measure had a very decisive
effect on the future of Bohemia, in consequence of the
marvellous intellectual activity of the Jesuit order, and the
unequalled knowledge of the country which its members
soon acquired.^

King Ferdinand left Bohemia soon after the suppression
of the disturbances of the year 1547, leaving his second son,
Archduke Ferdinand, as his representative. The king did
not then wish to confer that dignity on his eldest son
Archduke Maximilian, though the latter was about this
time — February 1549 — recognized as heir to the throne by
the Bohemian Estates. It seems unquestionable that
Maximilian's sympathy with Protestantism (founded, as it
was said, on the influence over him which the Lutheran
preacher Pfauser had acquired) caused a temporary es-
trangement between father and son. Maximilian did not
long continue to hold the views in question. It seems
likely that (as Ranke has suggested) the death of the Infant
Don Carlos and the possibility of Maximilian's succession
to the Spanish throne contributed to the abandonment of
his hostile attitude towards the Roman Church.

The triumph of the Roman Catholic cause in Germany,
which seemed assured by the battle of Miihlberg, was of
short duration. Duke Maurice of Saxony, who had, as a
reward for his services to the Emperor, obtained the Saxon
Electorate in the place of John Frederick, shortly afterwards
headed a new confederacy of the Protestant princes of
Germany against Charles V (1552). The Protestants were
this time more successful, and Charles V was obliged to
assume a more conciliatory attitude. The peace concluded
at Augsburg (1555) between the Emperor and the Protestant
princes recognized the status quo in Germany. The

^ The views of the more advanced utraquist^, or rather Lutherans,
are stated very forcibly by Andreas ab Habernfeld in his little known
but valuable work, Belluni Bohemicum. Lugduni Batavorum, 1645 •
" A primo Jesuitarum in Bohemiam introitu turbari regnum coeperat,
Regum Sacramenta Sanctiones donationesque vilia haberi. Status rei-
publicae optime constitus vitiari, aboleri consuetudines, Religionem
quae summum mortalitatis solatium est, intentari, inquisitionis Hispani-
cae seminaria inseri."

212 Bohemia

religious reforms which the Protestant princes had intro-
duced into their territories, and their confiscations of former
Church lands, thereby received the Emperor's sanction.
The Peace of Augsburg contained no reference to Bohemia,
but it greatly encouraged the Lutheran party in that
country.

After the abdication of Charles V (1558) Ferdinand
succeeded him as Emperor. Shortly before his death he
caused his son Maximilian, with whom he was now on
better terms, to be crowned as King of Bohemia (1562).
In the year 1564 Ferdinand entered into new negotiations
with Pope Pius IV for the purpose of reconciling the
moderate utraquists with the Roman Church. The death
of Ferdinand in the same year (July 25, 1564) interrupted
these negotiations.

Maximilian, as mentioned above, had already been
crowned King of Bohemia, and succeeded his father
without opposition as ruler of that country. " Maximilian
differed from most of his contemporaries, who were
generally either fiery adherents or bitter enemies of
Catholicism. During the whole of his life he was unable
to make up his mind definitely for or against the Catholic
cause. He played the part of a discontented son as long
as his father lived, opposed him, and surrounded himself
with enemies of the Catholic Church ; he avoided the
religious functions of that Church, and the Protestants
founded great hopes on his accession to the throne ; but as
soon as he succeeded his father he abandoned his former
attitude, began to favour the Catholics, and publicly
conformed to their creed." ^

Maximilian also succeeded his father as Emperor, and as
King of Hungary, and he further inherited part of the old
dominions of the house of Habsburg, Upper and Lower
Austria.2 Other duties therefore prevented him from im-
mediately assuming the government of Bohemia, where his
younger brother Ferdinand continued to act as regent.

It was only in 1567 that the new king visited Bohemia.

* Gindely, Rudolph II und seine Zeit.

2 Of Ferdinand I's other sons, the one (Ferdinand) inherited the
Tyrol, the other (Charles) Styria, with Carinthia Snd Carniola. Charles
was succeeded by his son Ferdinand, who subsequently became Em-
pt^ror as well as King of Bohemia and Hungary, under the name of
Ferdinand II.

An Historical Sketch 213

He immediately assembled the Estates, principally for the
purpose of obtaining aid against the Turks. The discussions
between the representatives of the towns and the nobility
were very violent. Religious questions were also again
introduced, to the great disgust of the king, who said that
*' it did not belong to him, and far less to them, but to the
Roman Pontiff and to the Church, to judge on religious
matters." ^ The king's hope that the Diet would only sit a
short time was not fulfilled. The Estates attempted to
obtain his assent, if not to the acceptance of the Lutheran
creed, at least to the suppression of the Compacts ; formerly
so greatly revered in Bohemia they had now become an
object of dislike to the more advanced reformers. The
king, on the other hand, maintained that no doctrines
differing from the Roman creed, except those contained in
the Compacts, were admissible in Bohemia. The Estates
thereupon sent a message to the king which greatly dis-
pleased him.2 Maximilian was finally obliged to abandon
his wish of excluding religious questions from the dis-
cussions of the Diet. He also found it necessary to
make a very important concession to the Estates : and, as
was wished, he declared that the Compacts no longer

^ The Venetian ambassador, Giovanni Michiel, writing from Prague,
March 17, 1567, says that the menaces of the Turks "con maggior
instantia che non si faceva fa Sua Maesta sollecitare la conclusione della
dieta di questo regno et essendo stati tutti questi giorni gran divisione
et contention! tra li cittadini da una parte et li baroni et nobili dall'
altra con esser mancato poco che non sono venuti a romore d'ahro che
di parola ; comparuen avanti hieri inanzi Sua Maesta instando la parte
de' cettadini con molti nobili fra loro di poter far alteratione nella
religiona volendosi ridunare alia confession Augustana benche non
I'esprimessero ; alii quali s'opposero questi pochi catholici che ci sono
(che sono pero li maggior signori et ufi&ciali del regno) con li quali
s'unirono anco molti di questi Hussiti, quelli cioe de communicano
'sub utraque,' mostrando che per le transationi et constitntioni
particolari del regno in materia di religione non si poteva fare altera-
tione dello stato presente ; sopia il quale articolo Sua Maesta disse che
non apparteue, a lei molto manco a loro conoscere sopra il fnttb di
religione ma apparteneva all pontefice Romano et alia chiesa agoriun-
gendo che non era tempo parlar di questo " (from the State Archives,
Venice).

^ "Hieri mattina tornando Sua Maesta de mezza presenti tutti noi,
li fu presentata una scrittura di non molta, decivano, sattisfatione di
lei, alia quale bisognera risposta che potria esser causa di maggior
lunghezza et pratration della dieta con molto dispiacere di Sua Maesta'*
(Despatch of the Venetian ambassador, Giovanni Michiel, dated Prague,
April 14, 1567. From the Slate Archives, Venice).

214 Bohemia

formed part of the fundamental law of the land. He thus
authorized the progress of Church reform beyond the very
narrow limits which that instrument imposed. The real
importance of this decree consisted in the implied sanction
which it thus gave to the existence of the Lutheran Church
and of the Unity of the Bohemian Brethren.

This concession did not insure religious tranquillity in
Bohemia, particularly as Maximilian refused several other
demands of the Estates. The incessant warfare with the
Turks in Hungary obliged him continually to apply to the
Estates for aid. The king, for this purpose, assembled a
Diet at Prague in 1575. Matters affecting religion were
again promptly brought forward by the Lutherans. It was
their purpose to obtain the recognition in Bohemia of the
so-called " Confession of Augsburg," in which the principal
points of Luther's doctrine had been enumerated. This
effort was opposed, not only by the Romanists, but also
by the old-utraquists. One of the latter, John, Lord of
Waldstein, the High Chamberlain, spoke strongly in favour
of maintaining the old national {i. e. utraquist) Church, and
opposed the acceptation of a " German religion." The
Lutherans now entered into an alliance with the Bohemian
Brethren ; they presented to the king a joint profession of
faith which is known as the "Confessio Bohemica." It
was in most points identical with the "Confession of Augs-
burg," but differed from it in some important points. Among
these was the doctrine concerning the sacrament of the
holy communion : and on this point the Bohemian profes-
sion of faith coincided rather with the teaching of Calvin and
the Bohemian Brethren than with that of Luther. The
*' Confessio Bohemica" contained twenty-five articles, and
included proposals as to the organization of the utraquist
Church. That Church had never recognized the authority
of the Roman Catholic Archiepiscopate of Prague, an
office reinstated by Ferdinand in 1561. It had, since the
death of Archbishop John of Rokycan, been ruled by a
Consistory, at the head of which was an "Administrator,"
who, together with the other members of the consistory,
was nominated by the king. The new proposal maintained
the system of government by a Consistory Council, but it
contained the important provision that the " Administrator "
and the other members should in future be appointed by
the Estates.

An Historical Sketch 215

These demands placed Maximilian in a difficult position.
At that moment he required the support of the Estates, not
only for the purpose of obtaining aid in the Turkish war, but
also to secure the election of his son Rudolph as King of
Bohemia. The Pope, on the other hand, threatened him
with excommunication should he make any further conces-
sions to the " heretics." The Spanish branch of the house
of Habsburg used all its influence towards the same end.
After protracted negotiations a compromise was at last de-
vised. The old Consistory, appointed by the king, con-
tinued to be the ruling body of the old-utraquist Church.

The Lutherans, however, who were now far the more
numerous body, were exempted from its jurisdiction.
They were authorized to choose fifteen " Defenders " — five
from each of the three Estates — who were to have the
supreme supervision over the Lutheran Church. The
" Defenders " were authorized to appoint for each district
a " Superintendent " (Moderator), whose office it was to
maintain order and discipline among the clergy.

In consequence of their separation from the more advanced
reformers the old-utraquists drew nearer and nearer to the
Church of Rome. Through the influence of the papal
nuncio the utraquist Consistory in 1587 secretly renounced
the entire teaching of Hus with the exception of communion
in the two kinds, and in 1593 the administrator Rezek, with
50 utraquist priests, declared Hus to be a heretic and
acknowledged the supremacy of the Pope.

Though they had not succeeded in securing the control
over the Bohemian utraquists, the Lutherans had obtained
a very valuable concession by the recognition of their Church
as a religious body under a separate administration. The
coronation of Archduke Rudolph as King of Bohemia
followed immediately afterwards (September 21, 1575), and
Maximilian almost at once left the country. His hasty
departure was caused by troubles concerning the succession
to the Polish throne. Maximilian was preparing for war
when he died (October 12, 1576), only forty-eight years of
age.

Maximilian is one of the Bohemian kings of the house of
Habsburg to whom history, perhaps in consequence of his
enigmatic nature, has done scant justice. He has both
among catholic and protestant historians found few friends.
He possessed, what at that period was rare, a genuine feeling

2i6 Bohemia

of toleration and of respect for the religious views of others.
It is true that this has by many been ascribed to in-
difference or scepticism, and it is almost certain that the
king, when dying, refused to partake of the last sacrament.
His well-known remark that the prince who would claim to
rule over the consciences of men would usurp the throne of
God, is at any rate a proof of an open-mindedness that was
very rare in his time.

Rudolph, who had already been crowned King of
Bohemia, was twenty-four years of age when he succeeded
his father as ruler of that land. He also succeeded his
father as Emperor of Germany and King of Hungary, and
inherited from him Upper and Lower Austria. His ac-
cession at first caused apprehension among the Lutherans
of Bohemia. Rudolph had been educated at the Spanish
court, and it was rumoured that he had there acquired
religious views of a more uncompromising character than
his father's had been. His attitude during the later and
more eventful years of his life, and the lack of interest
which he always showed in religious controversies, render
it probable that the teaching of the Spanish court made but
a slight impression on him. From the beginning of his
reign Rudolph fixed his residence at Prague, and thus in
a manner that town became the capital of all the extensive
dominions over which the Austrian branch of the house of
Habsburg ruled. ^ The new king from the first showed a
distinct tendency to melancholy, and a strong dislike to
political affairs.. The bent of his mind engrossed him in
subjects detrimental to his position as an emperor, and
which would better have befitted a wealthy person in private
life. Rudolph from his earliest youth showed great interest
in art, especially in painting, sculpture, and mosaic-work,

^ Dr. Gindely, Rudolph der Zweite und seine Zeit. The fact that
Prague had virtually become the capital of vast countries, together with
Rudolph's marked interest in the arts, resulted in a great enlargement
and embellishment of the town duiing his reign. Paul Stransky — no
friend of the house of Habsburg — quotes the following epigram to this
purpose —

"Lignea prima fuit, posuit cum limina Pragae
Jam tum surgenti prima Libussa suae
Marmorea inde stetit postquam super aethera turres
Extulit et magnas luxuriosa domos
Jam non marmorea est non lignea at aurea tota
Conlinua facta est sede Rodolphe tua."

An Historical Sketch 217

while of the sciences, chemistry and astronomy interested
him the most.^

The early part of the reign of Rudolph in Bohemia was
uneventful, and, had he died in middle Hfe, little mention of
his name would be required. Constant theological stiife,
absorbing the whole intellectual activity of the country, was
still the characteristic feature in Bohemia. The greatly :
increasing importance of Lutheranism, and the rapid decline
of the old-utraquist, and, in a lesser degree, of the Roman,
Church, have to be noted. The extinction ^f the latter
Church was — according to the opinion of Dr. Gindely,
the standard modern writer on this period of Bohemian
history — only averted by the marvellous activity of the
Jesuits. That order had at first not been numerous in
Bohemia.^ Its members, none the less, undertook the
apparently impossible task of recovering for the Church of
Rome the kingdom of Western Europe which had longest
been estranged from it. Aided, it is true, by the force of
arms, they were in the following century entirely successful.
One of the methods employed by the Jesuits was that of
acquiring influence over the wives of the great Bohemian
nobles. Since the accession of the house of Habsburg to
the Bohemian throne, many nobles had married ladies
from Spain or the districts of Italy subject to the Spanish
branch of the house of Habsburg. These ladies, strong
Catholics by birth, used their influence in favour of their
religion; it was said that they aided the Jesuits, Avhen
their means fell short, by gifts of money, clothing, and
victuals.

With the exception of occasional disputes between the
various religious bodies, Bohemia enjoyed internal and ex-
ternal peace during the first years of Rudolph's reign ; and
it was only after he had ruled for sixteen years that the ever-
increasing encroachments of the Turks on Hungary obliged
him to go to war with them. The seat of war was far from
the Bohemian frontier, and it did not greatly disturb the
tranquillity of the land. It was only through the annual
contributions, which the Diets voted, that the weight of the
war was felt.

This period of quiet in Bohemia would probably in no

^ Dr. Gindely, Rudolph der Zweite und seine Zeit.
^ In 1578, twenty years after their introduction, the Jesuit order only
counted forty members.
H 2

2i8 Bohemia

case have lasted long. The Lutherans, through the gradual
accession of the old-utraquists, now formed a large majority
of the population ; they were also, in any dispute with the
Catholics, certain of the support of the Brethren of the
"Unity.'- It was therefore inevitable that the Lutherans
should aspire to a predominant position in the country.
They had, indeed, already expressed their dissatisfaction
when the king appointed Catholics to most of the great
offices of the State. The Catholics, on the other hand,
were impatient of the comparative freedom which the " here-
tics" enjoyed. This feeHng increased when Archduke
Ferdinand of Styria carried out what was called a " Catholic
reformation " in that country. He suppressed all the liberties
which his father had granted to the Protestants, and expelled
all their ecclesiastics from his dominions.

Events were, however, precipitated by the mental illness
of Rudolph. Though he had long had a tendency to
melancholia, it was only in the year 1600 that traces of
mental aberration were noticed in him. The other members
of the Imperial family therefore suggested to Rudolph (who
had no legitimate descendants) that he should appoint a
successor ; it was further proposed that this successor should,
in case of Rudolph's being incapacitated from governing, act
as his representative as German Emperor, and as King of
Bohemia and Hungary. The enjoyment of the full honours
of the throne was left to Rudolph. This scheme was particu-
larly countenanced by the Archduke Matthew, the eldest of
Rudolph's brothers. An improvement in Rudolph's health,
however, soon took place, though he remained to the end of
his life subject to fits of mental disease.^ Henceforth, how-
ever, the state of Rudolph's health had a very detrimental
effect on his policy, which became indeed more active, but
was wanting in coherence, and tended to vary from one
extreme to another. About the time of the beginning of
Rudolph's illness a prophecy of the astronomer, Tycho
Brahe, had announced to him that he would share the fate
of King Henry III of France. This greatly alarmed him,
and inspired him with a violent dislike to the clergy, in
whose ranks he believed that his murderer, as in the case of
the French king, would be found. He therefore for a time
entirely ceased to attend religious services.

Only two years later Rudolph issued a decree (1602)
1 Gindely.

An Historical Sketch 219

renewing the enactments published in 1508 against the
Bohemian Brethren by King Vladislav. This declaration,
issued under totally different circumstances, menaced with
death all who professed religious views other than those of
the Catholics, and of the so-called old-utraquists, who differed
from the Catholics only in maintaining the Compacts. This
decree of Rudolph, which indirectly attacked the whole
Lutheran community as well as the Bohemian Brethren, was
publicly proclaimed in the streets of Prague with great
solemnity ; it caused, however, more surprise than fear. " It
was noticed that no preparations had been made to enforce
on nine-tenths of the population a decree to which it was
certain that the force of arms alone would induce it to
submit.^

This ill-advised proclamation appears to have been sug-
gested to Rudolph by the papal nuncio, then resident at
Prague. Though for the present it remained ineffective, it
greatly irritated the Protestants. ^ When the Diet met at
Prague (Jan. 9, 1603), the king's policy was sharply attacked
by the leader of the Protestants, Venceslas Budovec, Lord
of Budova, a noble belonging to the Unity of the Bohemian
Brethren. The Estates strongly protested against Rudolph's
decree. They declared it contrary to the promise of re-
ligious freedom which the late King Maximilian had made.
They at first refused to vote the grants of money to obtain
which the Diet had been summoned ; but on the advice of
Budova, finally consented to do so. The Estates had
previously drawn up a " Remonstrance," which they intended
to present to their king. Rudolph, however, immediately
after he had obtained the wished-for supplies, declared the
Diet closed (January 15, 1603). This step, as was natural,
still further estranged the Bohemians from their king, at a
moment when he was more than ever dependent on their
support.

^ Dr. Gindely, Rudolph I und seine Zeit, vol. i. p. 68. In the same
work (vol. i. p. 179), Gindely says that during the first years of the seven-
teenth century certainly not a tenth part of the nobility of Bohemia, and
a still smaller portion of the other classes, were Catholics. Catholicism
must at this period have decreased rapidly, if we compare these figures
with those Gindely gives for the sixteenth century. See note I, p. 206.

'^ Following Gindely's example, I give this joint designation to the
Lutherans and Bohemian Brethren when they acted in accord. From
this period to the suppression of religious liberty in Bohemia this union
was generally effective and real.

220 Bohemia

The adherents of the Roman Church in Bohemia were
fully aware of the fact that the king was unable to afford
them efficient aid ; still his now openly avowed support en-
couraged them to assume an attitude by no means in con-
formity with the smallness of their number in the country.
The Jesuit Landy, whom the Romanist Archbishop of Prague
consulted, suggested the expulsion of all foreigners from the
towns of Budejovice and Plzeii, w^hich still contained many
Catholics ; by such means only, he said, could the contagion
of "heresy" be prevented. The Catholic nobles, who,
though not numerous, owned large portions of the land, now
began to attempt the re-establishment of Catholicism on their
estates. Jaroslav Borita, Lord of Martinic, was especially
noted for his energetic attempts to force the peasants on his
estates to return to the Church of Rome. He commanded
them to be chased with his hounds, and thus forcibly driven
into the churches where the Jesuits preached ; and in order
to re-establish communion in one kind, he insisted that the
holy wafer should be forced down the throats of all his
peasants whom he suspected of heresy.^

. The attention of the militant religious parties was now for
a time diverted to the family dissensions in the house of
Habsburg. Ever since the failure of Rudolph's health his
brother, the Archduke Matthew, had expressed himself in
favour of depriving Rudolph of his Imperial and regal
authority; though he had not at first contemplated his
actual deposition. The events in Hungary now brought
this plan again to the fore. The Imperial armiies had at
that period been successful against the Turks, and a con-
siderable part of Hungary was for a time under Rudolph's
rule. These successes and momentary enthusiasm for the
Church of Rome induced Rudolph to attempt a " Catholic
reformation " in Hungary. He published a decree founded
on the ancient laws of Stephen — the first Christian king of
Hungary — by which he menaced all who spoke in public
about religious questions with the severest penalties. The
numerous Protestants in Hungary, no doubt justly, con-

^ "Baro de Martinic ferreo instrumento ore ad hiatum distento
hostias injici snbditis mandabat cogique ad idolorum ministerium "
(Habernfeld). Recent historians, writing from a strongly Roman
Catholic point of view, have, not very successfully, attempted to deny,
or at least to extenuate, the violence of Martinic and other Catholic
nobles at this time.

An Historical Sketch 221

sidered this as an attack on their creed ; they immediately
entered into an alliance with the Turks against Rudolph
(1604). The Imperial troops were totally unable to resist
the combined forces. Within a year from the publication
of the fatal decree, Hungarian bands had penetrated beyond
the frontier of the territories of the Bohemian crown.
Crossing from Hungary into Moravia they devastated a
considerable portion of that land. In this emergency the
princes of the house of Habsburg met at Linz in consulta-
tion. They decided to address a joint remonstrance to
Rudolph, begging him to cede the government of Hungary
to the Archduke Matthew. They also expressed the wish
that he would, in the absence of an heir to the throne,
appoint a successor. Somewhat later, Archduke Matthew
succeeded in obtaining a declaration from the Archdukes
Ferdinand,^ Maximilian, and Maximilian Ernest, by which
they recognized him as the head of the house of Habsburg.
The reason for this course was stated by them to be the
grave condition of Rudolph's health, the loss of Hungary,
and the devastation of other lands which had occurred in
consequence ; they also expressed their willingness to exercise
their influence in favour of Matthew's election to the Imperial
throne.

Rudolph had remained in a state of complete apathy
during the misfortunes that befell the countries of which
he was the nominal ruler. His conduct can indeed only be
explained by the mental disease from which he suffered at
times. Rudolph strongly distrusted his brother, the Arch-
duke Matthew, whom, not without reason, he suspected of
wishing to oust him from the throne. He long refused to
authorize his brother to negotiate with the Hungarians. At
last, partly through fear, he consented to do so ; and Matthew
concluded a treaty of peace with the Hungarians and with
Turkey (1606). New difficulties, however, arose, as Rudolph
now refused to ratify the treaty which had been concluded.

About this time, if not earlier, the Archduke Matthew
began to contemplate the dethronement of his brother.
There is little doubt that Matthew's conduct at this
moment, whether morally justifiable or not, saved the
house of Habsburg from complete ruin. That dynasty was
at this period seriously menaced by the ambition of Henry IV

^ Afterwards German Emperor under the name of Ferdinand II, as
well as King of Bohemia and Hungary.

222 Bohemia

of France, and of his allies the Protestant princes of Germany.
Prince Christian of Anhalt,^ the principal adviser of these
princes, had at this moment already entered into close con-
nection with some of the Protestant nobles of Bohemia,
particularly with Peter V6k, Lord of Rosenberg.

The first impulse to combined action against Rudolph
came, however, from Hungary, where his rule had always
been unpopular. His refusal to ratify the treaty of peace
with Turkey, and thus restore quiet to the land, caused
general dissatisfaction. The feeling against Rudolph was
in Austria^ and Moravia nearly as strong as in Hungary,
and the nobles of these countries soon entered into negotia-
tions with the Hungarian malcontents. Their first object,
however, was to come to a complete understanding among
themselves. With the approval of the Archduke Matthew,
several of the leading nobles of Moravia and Austria met at
Rossitz (in Moravia), under the pretext of affirming the
necessity of the ratification of the treaty of peace with
Turkey.

Subsequent events, however, render it certain that the
real object of these deliberations — which were held in
secret — was the deposition of Rudolph.

Shortly afterwards Archduke Matthew, still nominally as
representative of his brother, convoked the Hungarian Diet
at Presburg. Through the archduke's influence delegates
from Lower and Upper Austria were also present. This
very exceptional event was the result of Matthew's wish to
unite- the representatives of the various lands subject to
Rudolph for the purpose of procuring his deposition. The
racial enmities at this period for the moment disappeared,
and Slav, German, and Hungarian nobles acted in accord.

All present at the deliberations of Presburg solemnly
pledged themselves to maintain the treaty with Turkey
against all its opponents. The carefully-worded declaration
was directly aimed at Pvudolph, who still refused to sanction
that treaty, and in efi'ect the authority of the sovereign was
by it tacitly suspended. Moravia very shortly followed the
example of Austria and Hungary, principally through the

1 Dr. Gindely's works, especially his Rudolph II und seine Zeit, show
how great was the influence of Christian of Anhalt on the events in
Bohemia at this period.

2 The term " Austria " at this period, of course, indicates the Arch-
duchy of Upper and Lower Austria.

An Historical Sketch 223

influence of Charles, Lord of !^erotin. Carotin belonged
to the Unity of the Bohemian Brethren, and the vastness of
his estates, combined with his great learning and piety, had
raised him to the foremost rank among the nobles of
Moravia. On his advice, and that of Charles, Lord of
Liechtenstein, the Moravian Estates assembled at Ivancice.
They here addressed to Rudolph remonstrances — similar to
those of Austria and Hungary — concerning his refusal to
ratify the treaty of peace with Turkey. They also made
mention of special grievances of their own, principally
referring to the conduct of Rudolph's officials in Moravia.

Archduke Matthew had meanwhile raised troops in
Austria, and at their head he entered Moravia. His
reception was of a very friendly character. Some of the
Estates of that country had already been won over by
Zerotin to his cause. On his arrival at the town of
Znoymo, Matthew issued a proclamation (April 1608),
declaring that as the oldest member of the house of
Habsburg he had assumed the government of the countries
which the incapacity of Rudolph had brought to the verge
of ruin. He further stated that he now intended — accom-
panied by delegates of the Estates of Hungary, Upper and
Lower Austria, and Moravia — to march to Bohemia.^ He
called on the Estates of that country to meet him at Caslav
on May 4, where a deliberation between the representatives
of the various peoples and countries was to take place.

V/hile the countries formerly subject to his rule were
gradually slipping away from his control, Rudolph remained
at Prague in a state of complete irresolution. He at last
decided to assemble a " General Diet " ^ of the lands of the
Bohemian Crown at Prague. Only the Estates of Bohemia,
however, appeared on March 10, the day fixed for the
meeting. Contrary to expectation, the result of their
deliberations was favourable to Rudolph. After having
given their approval to the meeting of a "General Diet,"
which was now fixed for April 14, the Estates authorized
the king to take the necessary steps for the defence of the
country. This declaration, according to the traditions of
the country, authorized the king to call out the whole armed
force of the land.

^ The ordinary Diets consisted of delegates of Bohemia only. The
" General Diet " at this period, included also representaiives of
Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia.

224 Bohemia

The attitude of the Bohemian Estates at this moment is
in singular contrast with their former dislike to their king,
and it is difficult to give a satisfactory account of the reason
for it. It seems probable that the independent aciion
of Moravia, which had, though to an ill-defined and varying
extent, always been considered a dependency of the
Bohemian crown, irritated the Bohemian nobles. It is also
probable that the influence of Peter of Rosenberg encour-
aged the Estates to support Rudolph, and consequently to
decline meeting the Archduke Matthew. Rosenberg was
on terms of intimacy with Christian of Anhalt, who had
made the destruction of the house of Habsburg the object
of his life.i Astute politician as he was, Anhalt cannot but
have seen that the substitution of a more energetic prince
as head of the German branch of the Habsburg dynasty
would not be favourable to his purpose. The prolongation
of the contest between Rudolph and his brother was pro-
bably the object of Anhalt's wishes, and it seems likely that
he therefore advised Rosenberg and his friends, who had
previously been in communication with Matthew, not to
support him.

Rudolph's state of health, however, rendered him unable
to take full advantage of the temporary feeling in his favour
among the Bohemians ; Archduke Matthew's forces had
meanwhile entered Bohemia. During the march and after
his arrival at Caslav, Matthew received repeated messages
from his brother proposing a peaceful agreement. Cardinal
Dietrichstein, at this moment Rudolph's most influential
adviser, made no less than five journeys to Matthew's camp
as bearer of proposals of peace. The Spanish ambassador
at Prague also made efforts to effect a reconciliation between
the two brothers. But for the present Matthew declined
all proposals of peace, and demanded that Rudolph should
abdicate and leave Bohemia.

The Estates of Bohemia, who, as already mentioned,
had declined Matthew's invitation to Caslav, again met at
Prague. Though April 14 had previously been agreed on
as the day of meeting, the deliberations only began on
May 23. On this occasion, also, Bohemia was alone repre-
sented. As had now become customary, the Estates
immediately applied to the king for the redress of their

^ The expression ''terminus fatalis domus Austriacae" is quoted by
Gindely from Anhalt's correspondence of this time.

An Historical Sketch 225

grievances. Commissioned by them, their leader Budovec
of Budova drew up their demands in twenty-five "articles " ;
these were presented to the king, signed by three hundred
nobles and knights, and by the representatives of all the
towns of Bohemia, with the exceptions of Plzef^, Budejovice,
and Kaaden. The " articles " demanded that the Bohemian
Confession 1 should be included among the fundamental
lewi of the land, and that complete religious freedom should
be granted to all classes. This stipulation would have
conferred freedom of belief also on the peasants, who were
then serfs or bondmen, and it was therefore in opposition
to the prevailing ideas of the period. It undoubtedly
originated from Budova himself, whose greater culture and
more enlightened views distinguished him from the other
members of his party.^ Budova may also have thought it
politic to obtain for the Protestants the support of the
masses; for only with that support could they hope to
resist the desperate attack which — as he certainly foresaw —
awaited them as soon as the then divided strength of the
house of Habsburg was reunited. The other "articles'^
demanded that Protestants and Catholics should have
equal right to the offices of State, that the right of the
Jesuits to acquire land should be limited, and that foreigners
should be ineligible for the dignity of Archbishop of Prague.
The other " articles " referred to various grievances con-
cerning the administration of the country, which through
the apathy of Rudolph had fallen into a state of great
disorder ; and to several other matters of minor importance.
It was practically impossible for Rudolph to resist these
demands. Archduke Matthew was marching rapidly on
Prague, and there was no doubt that, influenced as he then
was by ^erotin, the leader of the Unity in Moravia, he
would immediately accept the twenty-five " articles " in
their entirety should the Bohemians recognize him as their
king. Rudolph, however, still hesitated. He finally gave
his approval to some of the articles, but said that others,
principally those referring to religious matters, should be
reserved for the consideration of the next Diet, where they
should have precedence over all other subjects of discus-
sion. The Protestant Estates, on Budova's advice, accepted

* See p. 214.

2 " Mit starken Rauschen " : Gindely, quoting a contemporary
manuscript.

226 Bohemia

this compromise, and declined to accept the advice of
Zerotin, who had been sent by Archduke Matthew to
Prague, not only as envoy, but also to promote the recogni-
tion of that prince as king. A temporary agreement
between the king and the Estates having been arrived at,
Archduke Matthew rightly judged that he had no im-
mediate hope of gaining Bohemia. His army had arriv^ed
close to Prague, and it was at Liben, within a short
distance of that city, that a treaty of peace was concluded
between the two brothers (June 25, 1608). According to
this treaty Rudolph remained sovereign of Bohemia ; but
Hungary, Moravia, and Upper and Lower Austria were
ceded to Matthew. The restoration of peace was cele-
brated in the archduke's camp by a banquet, to which the
Bohemian nobles who had sided with Rudolph were also
invited They returned to Prague "very intoxicated."^
The archduke's forces almost immediately after the treaty
left Bohemia, where some of them, particularly Matthew's
Hungarian soldiers, had committed great depredations.

The Diet which was to regulate the religious affairs of
Bohemia only met on January 28, 1609 : it was one of the
most momentous assemblies with which this sketch of
the country's history has to deal. A detailed account of
the prolonged discussions which ensued would be beyond the
purpose of this book; the final success of the hopes of
the Protestant Estates was, however, beyond doubt from the
first. From this moment until that of his death, Rudolph
displayed an implacable and perhaps not unnatural enmity
to his brother. Rudolph had attempted (soon after Matthew
had obtained possession of Austria) to outbid him for the
favour of the Protestants of that country, and he had even
entered into negotiations with Christian of Anhalt. This
was as well known to the Bohemian Protestants as was the

^ The influence of Budova sprang from his learning and affability of
manners. Long residence in most of the countries of Europe, and
familiarity with many languages, alike contributed to distinguish him.
Since his return to Bohemia he had employed his time partly as an
author, partly as leader of his party in the Diet. Being one of the
most ardent adherents of the Unity of the Bohemian Brethren, he was
in closer contact with the people than most other nobles ; for the nobles
of the Unity put no restraint on tlie consciences of their dependents,
and showed due consideration to creeds differing from their own.
Tl)eir attitude necessarily produced a favourable impression on the
masses (Gindely, Rudolph II).

An Historical Sketch 227

fact that Rudolph had, in consequence, no hope of aid
from Spain or from the Catholics of Germany. Having
these facts in view, we can only account for his next step
by the vacillation induced by his frail state of health.
Acting probably under the influence of the High Chan-
cellor i^denek of Lobkowitz, a fanatical Romanist, Rudolph
at first assumed a most uncompromising attitude towards
the Protestants. He demanded that the petition which the
Estates had addressed to him during Matthew's invasion
(the so-called Twenty-five Articles), with the signatures
attached to it, should be delivered up to him for destruc-
tion. He declared that he considered that the contents
of that document constituted a confederacy formed without
his permission, and therefore an act of rebellion. The
Estates, adroitly using this demand to their own advantage,
chose twelve of their number who were to present the
petition to Rudolph with its signatures, " so that the king
might learn the names of his faithful subjects." Among
the members of this deputation was Henry Matthew, Count
Thurn, a foreigner and a German, who was not even
thoroughly acquainted with the Bohemian language ; he
was none the less now beginning to obtain influence in the
country, more through his resolution and self-confidence
than through his talents.

Rudolph, seeing the impossibility of maintaining his
former uncompromising attitude, once more gave way, and
consented to the religious question being brought before
the Diet. The Estates now, as in the previous year,
demanded the recognition of the Bohemian Confession of
1575 ; they presented a petition to this purpose by a new
deputation consisting of ten members. Rudolph returned
no immediate answer. He demanded that a copy of the
" Confessio Bohemica " should be presented to him, and
then showed it to the Roman Catholic Archbishop of
Prague, and to the papal nuncio. As was to be expected,
the two ecclesiastics expressed unfavourable opinions of
the rConfession. Rudolph at last decided to reply by
letter to the petition. He demanded the complete accepta-
tion of the Roman faith and ritual, with the only exception
that communion might still be received by laymen in both
kinds. He called on the Estates to recognize the authority
of the Catholic Archbishop of Prague, and to expel all
heretical preachers. The Estates considered this letter to

228 Bohemia

be contrary to the decree of the Emperor Maximilian 11,^
whereby the Compacts (the formula containing the views
of the old-utraquist party) had been suppressed. The
first result of the royal message was the cessation of a
temporary disagreement which had arisen between the
Lutherans and the Bohemian Brethren. Under the guid-
ance of Count Thurn, who urged " that since the king had
only recognized the existence of the Roman Catholics and
of the utraquists, both the other Churches were in equal
danger," they resolved to unite against the common enemy.
Practically ignoring the king's message, the Estates decided
to elect a committee, which was to define more accurately
their demands with regard to the religious question. The
Protestants now again not only demanded the recognition
of the " Confessio Bohemica," but put forward further
claims. They insisted that the Consistory (the governing
body of the utraquist Church) and the University of Prague
should be placed under the direction of the Protestants (/. e.
of the united Lutherans and Bohemian Brethren). They
founded their demand on the fact that the Roman Catholics
also had the management of their own religious institutions.
It is certain that the two now united Churches comprised
an enormous majority of the population, while the so-called
" old " or Catholic utraquists, who still controlled the Con-
sistory, since the year 1593 no longer existed as a body
distinct from the Roman Church.

Rudolph's advisers replied in writing, and an exchange
of messages — four on each side — took place between them
and the Estates. These communications in no way advanced
matters. Rudolph at last (March 31, 1609) declared to a
deputation of the Estates that addressed him, that he was
unable to make any concessions with regard to ecclesiastical
affairs ; and expressed a wish that the Estates would now
turn their attention to other matters. This specially referred
to the king's pecuniary requirements, the discussion of which
had been postponed till after the religious matters had been
settled. The high burgrave, Adam, Lord of Sternberg, a
fervent Roman Catholic, made a similar statement to the
full assembly of the Estates ; he added that the king was
resolved to close the Diet if the Estates did not comply
with his wish. Budova thereupon exclaimed loudly : " Who-
ever loves his salvation, his king, and the good of his country,
^ Maximilian I as King of Bohemia.

An Historical Sketch 229

whoever desires to increase union and mutual love, whoever
remembers the fervour of our ancestors, whoever holds his
honour precious, let him appear here ^ to-morrow morning
at six o'clock." Aided by some of his friends, Budova
during the night drew up a declaration justifying the attitude
of the Estates, and couched in very firm language. After
explaining that it was impossible for the Estates to debate
on other subjects before the ecclesiastical matters were
settled, this document announced their intention to arm
in defence of their king, their country, and their personal
safety. The Estates declined further correspondence with
the king, as he did not appear to wish it : they were, how-
ever, decided to resist with force of arms whatever injury
might be done to any one of their number. This declara-
tion received the approval of a large meeting of Protestants,
which took place in the town-hall of the Nove Mesto early
in the morning (April i). The Protestants then proceeded
to the Diet, and Budova read out their declaration. Im-
mediately afterwards the supreme burgrave declared the
Diet dissolved.

This ill-considered step was, from the point of view of
the Bohemians, nothing less than a coup d'etat. In view of
the king's health, he can by no means be considered its
originator. The king's counsellors, Lobkowitz and Stern-
berg, and the papal nuncio — for whom total ignorance of
Bohemian affairs afforded some excuse — must bear the
responsibility. Without any previous preparations to en-
force the royal authority, they recklessly attempted to resist
the will of nine-tenths of the Bohemian people.

Before leaving Prague, the nobles and knights of Bohemia
decided to reassemble there within a month. This resolu-
tion accentuated their revolutionary attitude, for the old
customs of Bohemia reserved to the king the right to
assemble the Estates of the realm. As early as the end
of April, many Protestant lords returned to Prague ; they
had meanwhile armed their retainers on their lands. The
Estates were soon assembled in great numbers, and it
was said that never since the Hussite wars had so many

^ As will be mentioned presently, the meeting of the Protestants,
contrary to Budova's words, took place in the town-hall of the Nove
Mesto, not on the Hradcany, where the Estates met. The cause of
this was probably the desire to exclude the Roman Catholic members
of the Diet.

230 Bohemia

nobles and knights been seen at Prague. The town-hall of
the Neustadt had again been fixed on as the place of meet-
ing, but the Estates, wishing to maintain the appearance of
legality, petitioned Rudolph to allow them to assemble in
the royal palace on the Hradcany,i ^\^q ^3^^! meeting-place
of the Diet. Budova, accompanied by a large number of
his supporters, called on the burgrave to urge this demand.
The answer was a direct negative. The burgrave, however,
promised that the king would shortly again convoke the
Estates. Budova left the palace on the Hradcany where
the interview had taken place, and announced the failure of
his mission to his adherents, many of whom had been wait-
ing at the gates of the castle. All present thereupon lifted
their hands to heaven, and swore to remain united ; they
further decided to meet in the town-hall of the Nove Mesto,
or new town, and they henceforth held almost daily meet-
ings there. Budova was for the moment the undisputed
leader of the movement, which through his influence
acquired a devotional, and, indeed, somewhat puritanic
character. When Budova presided over the deliberations
of the Estates he called on all present to join him in
prayer; all then knelt down and sang a hymn. The
Estates decided to forward another message to the king
in defence of their conduct, which, as already noted, was
contrary to the constitutional traditions. They also deter-
mined again to beg him to summon a regular Diet. To
draw up this petition they chose four lawyers, two of whom
were Lutherans, and two Brethren of the Unity. When
they had finished their work, it was laid before the king
by six representatives of the Estates. Budova was again
at the head of the deputation. Great excitement reigned
at Prague at the moment of its reception by the king. The
interview lasted very long, and the report that the delegates
had been imprisoned in the castle was circulated in the
town. A large crowd assembled round the Jesuit monastery,
in the new town, prepared to make reprisals on those who
were known to be the chief opponents of the wishes of the
country. The rumour was, however, false. Budova and
his companions returned unharmed, and the report now
circulated in the town that the king had acceded to the
wishes of the people.

1 The enormous palace, or rather series of palaces, on the Iliadcany
included the residence of the king and of the great State officials, as

An Historical Sketch 231

This report was not unfounded. The great state of ex-
citement at Prague, where the streets were crowded by the
noisy retinue of the numerous nobles and knights, had not
escaped the king's notice, even in his seclusion on the
summit of the Hradcany ; he had in consequence fallen
into a state of complete nervous prostration. Hannewald,
one of the few among his councillors whom the king
trusted, advised him — contrary to the wishes of the papal
nuncio and of the Spanish ambassador — to come to terms
with the Protestants. The Spanish ambassador, Zuniga,
had just returned to Prague from Gratz, where he had
visited the Archduke Ferdinand, who governed Styria. On
his return, Zuniga had immediately laid before Rudolph his
— or perhaps the archduke's — views, namely, that only a
resolute attitude would intimidate the Protestants. The
ambassador had been confirmed in this opinion by the
panic which he believed his entry into Prague at the head
of a body-guard of fifty men had caused. Zuniga therefore
attempted to strike terror in the hearts of the Bohemians.
While waiting for an audience in the antechambers of the
royal castle, he, in the presence of numerous Protestants,
addressed Count Sultz, one of the courtiers, in very strong
words, begging him to advise the king to resist the demands
of the Protestants, and promising him the full support of
Spain. This fooHsh bravado had a contrary effect to the
one desired. Rudolph requested the ambassador to appear
no longer in the antechambers of the castle, and was more
than ever inclined to rely on Hannewald's advice. He
therefore now decided that the Estates should, with his
sanction, reassemble on the Hradcany on May 25, and that
the religious question should be the first subject for debate.

This decision, of which Budova and his colleagues were
informed, was considered as satisfactory by the Estates, and
the agitation among the people of Prague for the time sub-
sided. The Estates again met in the royal castle on the
Hradcany on May 25.^ Rudolph having addressed no mes-
sage to the Diet, the Estates again drew up a memorandum
formulating their demands. The most important of them

well as the seat of the supreme courts of justice and the meeting-place
of the Diets.

^ It is worthy of notice, as a proof of the decline of Romanism in
Bohemia at this period, that of the nobles, knights, and town represen-
tatives present, only one-tenth belonged to that Church (Gindely).

^32 Bohemia

again dealt with the recognition of the " Confessio Bohemica"
by the State, and of the claims of the Protestants that the
Consistory Council and the University should be placed
under their control.

Before the memorandum had been submitted to the king,
consideration hostile to the Bohemians had once more
prevailed in his vacillating mind. Archduke Leopold, a
younger brother of Archduke Ferdinand of Styria, arrived
at Prague at this moment. He for a time ingratiated him-
self with Rudolph, who (animated by his dislike to his
brother Matthew) seriously thought of declaring Leopold
his successor. It is to this archduke, a fervent Romanist,
and to the Spanish ambassador Zuniga, that the altered
tone of Rudolph's message in reply to the Estates (June 5)
must be attributed. He declared that he would extend to
the Protestants the same degree of toleration which they
had enjoyed under Ferdinand I ; he thus withdrew even the
concessions made to them by the more liberal-minded sove-
reign, Maximilian H.

The Protestants considered this decision as a declaration
of war. Count Thurn declared in the Diet that there had
been enough useless talk, that the moment for action had
arrived, and that the country must immediately take up
arms. The committee appointed by the Estates had mean-
while drawn up three documents. Ignoring the royal
message, which purported to decide the question, these
documents were now brought before the Estates and im-
m.ed lately approved of by them. The first, in the form of an
address to the king — to whom, however, it was never pre-
sented— informed him that the Protestant Estates, having
now fully stated their arguments, would no longer appeal to
him in defence of their creed. The second document con-
tained a severe and detailed criticism of Rudolph's policy :
this had not been prepared with a view to presentation to
the sovereign. Written rather as a proclamation to the
people, it ended with the announcement that a general arma-
ment of the country would be necessary, and must shortly
take place. The third, and by far the most important work
of the committee, was a minute detailing the concessions
which the Protestants considered necessary as guarantees of
their freedom and autonomy. It is significant of the confi-
dence felt by the Protestants that, in spite of Rudolph's
.apparently uncompromising attitude, they should have

An Historical Sketch 233

drawn up this document at this moment. It is this draft
that was finally accepted by the king, and is known as the
celebrated " Letter of Majesty."

Only the last-named document was presented to Rudolph
by a deputation of the Estates (June 13). The king's
answer, though more conciliatory than some of his former
communications, did not satisfy the Protestants. He pro-
mised to continue to the Protestants the enjoyment of all
the rights which th6y had had during the reign of Maximi-
lian.^ The king, however, insisted on retaining complete
authority over the utraquist Consistory and over the Univer-
sity. If we consider the bitter theological animosity of the
age, it will not appear surprising that the Protestants were
not prepared to concede this point. Had they done so,
they would have admitted the right of a sovereign — himself
a Romanist — to appoint as rulers of their Church men who
acknowledged the authority of the Roman creed though they
differed from it with regard to communion in both kinds.
It was impossible for an assembly in which an enormous
majority were Lutherans and Brethren of the Unity, to
accept the king's demand. His message was, therefore,
considered by the Protestants as a refusal of their demands,
and it served in fact only to increase their opposition. The
project of arming the country was further advanced, and — as
it w^as difficult for such an unwieldy body as the Estates to
exercise executive functions — thirty " Directors" were chosen
from among the members of the Diet. These, as Gindely
says, practically constituted a provisional government.
Three generals, the foremost of whom was Count Thurn,
were also appointed by the Estates, and the enrolment of
troops began, a special tax having been voted for this pur-
pose. The Estates of Silesia concluded an alliance with
those of Bohemia for mutual defence, and there also the
armament of the people was undertaken.

The danger of civil war, which now seemed inevitable,
induced the Elector of Saxony to attempt to mediate.
Himself a Lutheran, he had strong claims on the confidence
of the Estates. Dr. Gerstenberger, the Elector's ambassa-
dor at Prague, in his master's name proposed a compromise.
The free profession of the " Confessio Bohemica " was to be

^ As has been noticed previously, the position of the Protestants had
been more secure during the reign of that prince than during that of hiS
father, Ferdinand I.

234 Bohemia

allowed to all ; Catholics were to be allowed to adopt :he
Protestant, and Protestants the Catholic, creed ; all members
of the Diet were to have the right of building churches
and schools without any distinction of creed ; the super-
vision and direction of the Consistory and of the University
were to remain in the hands of the king.

These terms, if immediately accepted by the king, would
perhaps have satisfied the Estates. Rudolph, however,
declared that he would only sanction Gerstenberger's pro-
posals if it were agreed that the liturgy of the old-utraquists
should be retained by the Protestants. This objection
naturally caused a fatal delay. The Protestants disliked to
confide the direction of their Church to a sovereign who
professed a creed different from their own, and the less con-
ciliatory party among the Estates at last got the upper hand.
When the burgrave announced to the Diet the king's de-
cision, as mentioned above, the Protestants declared that
the negotiations were fruitless, and must be broken off;
many even left Prague and returned to their castles to com-
plete their armaments. The " Directors," who established
themselves in the town-hall of the Stare Mesto (old town of
Prague) acted as a provisional government, and directed the
general arming of the country. Rudolph was again entirely
helpless, and — probably again on the advice of Hannewald —
decided to abandon his undignified and hopeless resistance.
By his order the supreme burgrave invited the Diet to resume
its sittings, and the king on July 9, 1609, signed the Letter
of Majesty. The Estates had previously consented to the
substitution of the word " utraquist " for that of " evangelical,"
which had been used in the draft submitted to the king.

By the Letter of Majesty the Protestant Estates ob-
tained the recognition of the "Confessio Bohemica,"and the
right of supervision over the University, and were authorized
henceforth to elect the members of the Consistory. They
were further empowered to appoint " Defenders," who were
to be chosen in equal number from among the Protestant
nobles, the knights, and town representatives. The ill-defined
office of the " Defenders " implied in reality the duty of acting
as the guardian of the rights of the Protestants. On the same
day, another equally important but far less celebrated docu-
ment was signed. This was an Agreement between the
Protestants and Romanists, or, to use the official designa-
tion, the Estates " sub utraque " and those " sub una." By

An Historical Sketch 235

this Agreement they guaranteed to each other full liberty of
religious worship, which was to be extended to the peasants
also ; the full right of the Protestants to appoint priests to
the livings in their gift was recognized, and it was further
agreed that on the lands of the crown ^ both religious
parties should be allowed to worship freely according to
their creed, and to build churches.

This last provision requires special notice. The great
Hussite revolution had been followed by a complete confis-
cation of the property of the Romanist Church in Bohemia ;
the poverty of the clergy being one of the most important
points of the early Hussite creed, and one that is specially
referred to in the Compacts. Through the good-will of
King Sigismund and his successors — all of whom, with the
exception of George of Podebrad, were Romanists — the
Catholic Church had again received gifts of land and other
property. These gifts were, however, assumed to have been
made temporarily to individuals, and the Church property
continued legally to be a portion of the lands of the crown ;
this fiction was undoubtedly maintained out of respect to the
strong feeling of the utraquists on this matter.

For the same reason the clergy did not, till after the com-
plete reaction which followed the battle of the White Moun-
tain, constitute one of the Estates of the realm. The right
of building churches, granted to those who dwelt on the
lands of the crown, therefore included those who lived on
land OAvned by the Church. It is this question that was —
nine years later— the immediate cause of the Thirty Years'
War, the Archbishop of Prague having caused the Protestant
Church of Hrob ^ to be destroyed while the Abbot of Bfevnov
closed a church in the town of Broumov which was under
his authority.^

^ The estates belonging to the king and the towns under his imme-
diate sovereignty, and enjoying special immunities, were thus designated.
They were in this way distinguished from the estates of the nobles and
the towns which were built on land belonging to nobles.

'^ In German "Klostergrab."

^ This important question is fully elucidated by Dr. Gindely. In his
earlier work [Geschichte der Ertheihing des Bohmischen Majestdts-
briefes) the great Bohemian historian attempted to defend the conduct
of the Archbishop of Prague and of the Abbot of Bfevnov. He then
only considered the Letter of Majesty, ignoring the Agreement
signed at the same time. In his Rudolph II und seine Zeit, Dr.
Gindely with great frankness modifies his former opinion. The right of
Protestants to build churches on lands owned by Roman ecclesiastics was

236

Bohemia

The momentary settlement obtained through the Letter
of Majesty and the Agreement signed on the same day,
which afterwards received the king's approval, did not long
ensure peace to Bohemia. Its provisions have consequently
always been subjected to very hostile comment, specially by
writers of strong papal bias. To those who examine the
numerous contemporary records with impartiality, it will
perhaps be apparent that under more favourable circum-
stances these charters might have secured to Bohemia a
much-required respite from theological strife. It is certain
that from this date the attitude of the Protestants ceased to
be an aggressive, and henceforth became a distinctly defen-
sive, one.^

Neither the provisions of the Letter of Majesty nor the
conduct of the Protestants suffice to explain the fact that
troubles so soon recommenced in Bohemia. These troubles
are rather to be attributed to the circumstance (the causes
of which are beyond the scope of this book) that the policy
of the Spanish court became more active and aggressive
about the beginning of the seventeenth century. We must
also take into account the success with which the Archduke
Ferdinand (whose accession to the throne of Bohemia
appeared more and more probable) had carried out the
" Catholic Reformation " in Styria, a success which raised
the hopes and increased the energy of the Jesuits and other
enthusiasts for the Roman cause in Bohemia.

The last years of the reign of Rudolph are of little
interest, compared with the momentous events of 1608 and
1609. The king's only concern seems to have been his
desire for revenge on his brother Matthew, who had de-

undeniable. The Protestant citizens of Hrob and Broumov had the law
on their side.

^ The Protestants of Bohemia, even after they had risen in arms
against King Matthew (in 1618), maintained that the stipulations of the
Letter of Majesty and the Agreement, if faithfully carried out, would
have completely satisfied them. In the letter ad'lressed to King James I
of England by the " Directors" (dated Prague, Nov. 3 (New Style),
1618), they stated that "post multa certaminasingulari Dei providentia
a Rudolpho Secundo Imperatore, et Rege Nostro beatae memoriae non
modo libertas religionis nobis evangelicis concessa sed etiam diplomate
Caesareo stabilita et a moderno etiam Caesare domino nostro clementis-
simo solemniter confirmata, sanctaque pax et libertas religionis inter
DOS Evangelicos sub Utr^que et Pontificios sub Una vulgo nominates
erecta fuit " (from the copy of the letter preserved in the Stale
Archives, Venice).

An Historical Sketch 237

prived him of Hungary, Austria, and Moravia. He chose
his cousin, the Archduke Leopold, as the instrument of his
vengeance. He appears to have promised him the succes-
sion to the Bohemian throne, thus infringing on the rights
of Matthew, whom the Estates — on Rudolph's own recom-
mendation— had recognized, as well as on those of
Ferdinand of Styria, Leopold's elder brother. The king
and Archduke Leopold, it is clear, also aimed at the
suppression of the concessions recently granted to the Pro-
testants, and at the forcible re-establishment of the Catholic
Church in Bohemia. There is, however, little positive
evidence as to the object of Rudolph's varying schemes
at this period. With his approval. Archduke Leopold, who
was bishop of Strassburg and Passau, assembled an armed
force near the latter town. The religious troubles then
prevailing in Germany afforded a pretext. The troops of
Leopold, commanded by Lawrence Ramees (or Romeo)
in the year 1611, marched into Bohemia and obtained
possession of Budejovice, Tabor, Krumlov and other towns
in the south of the country. They committed great
cruelties during their march,^ and after having arrived
before Prague stormed the Mala Strana, the part of the
town situated on the left bank of the Vltava. Archduke
Leopold now joined his troops, and they attempted to
obtain possession of the other parts of Prague. They were,
however, repulsed by the soldiers under Count Thurn, whom
the Estates — anxious for their recently-acquired liberties —
had hastily equipped. Rudolph's brother. King Matthew
of Hungary, also came to the aid of the Bohemian Estates.
He not unnaturally considered his right of succession to
the Bohemian throne as imperilled by Leopold's action.
That prince now (March 161 1) left Bohemia as suddenly as
he had appeared there. The Estates of Bohemia, suspecting
their king of being the originator of this sudden invasion of
the country, forced him to abdicate. Matthew became
King of Bohemia, and the dependent lands, Silesia and
Lusatia, also recognized him as their sovereign. Rudolph,
who had been in failing health for some time, did not long

'■ A contemporary French newsletter (Arras 161 1) states: "Romeo
continuant son chemin vers Prague avec I'armee Leopoldienne donna
une telle espouvante aux Bohemiens par ou il passa que craignans plus
les siens que les Turcs mesmes, ils abandonnoient leurs maisons et
leurs biens pour s'exempter de lumber sous leur cruante ! "

238

Bohemia

survive his final dethronement. He died on January 20,
1 61 2. Matthew was then also chosen as Emperor by the
German Electors.

The policy of Matthew with regard to the religious affairs
of Bohemia underwent a change when the twelve years'
struggle between him and his brother came to an end. His
amicable relations with the Protestant leaders, such as
^erotin and Rosenberg, were broken off about this time.
Distrust of the new king can easily be traced in the de-
mands which the Estates addressed to him even before his
coronation. Five points were specially brought forward, as
embodying the wishes of the Estates. The most important
among the concessions demanded were the right of the
Diet to assemble without royal authorization, and the right
to levy troops. The king conceded only one point of minor
importance. He gave his sanction to the treaty of alliance
which the Bohemian Protestants had (1609) concluded with
the Estates of Silesia in defence of their faith. On the
other points, among which were the two of most importance,
the king reserved his decision.

The peace with Turkey which Matthew had concluded
(in 1606) did not secure permanent tranquillity in Eastern
Europe. Matthew, forced to renewed warfare with the Turks,
was obliged to apply for aid to the Estates of the many
countries over which the German branch of the house of
Habsburg ruled. He first appealed to a representative
assembly, which consisted of deputies from all the lands of
the Bohemian crown,^ from Hungary, and from Upper and
Lower Austria. Representatives of Styria (which with
Carinthia and Carniola was then governed by the Archduke
Ferdinand) and of the Tyrol were also present. This
assembly, remarkable as the only one in which representatives
of almost all the lands now constituting the Austro-Hungarian
Empire ^ sat in one parliamentary body, was entirely abortive.
When the deputies met at Linz (16 14), it soon appeared
that their only purpose was the further limitation of the
sovereign power in the different States which they represented.
They declined all contributions towards the expenses of the
war against Turkey. Frustrated in this plan, Matthew was
obliged to appeal to the assemblies of the different countries

1 See p. 178.

2 Dalmatia, Galicia and the Bukowina only became part of the
Habsburg dominions many years later.

An Historical Sketch 239

which, though all owing allegiance to him, still possessed
separate political and representative institutions. Limiting
our account to Bohemia, we will only mention the fact that
Matthew convoked a " General Diet " of the lands of the
Bohemian crown at Prague in the following year (1615).
Here also the king's attempts to obtain grants of money
and men for the Turkish war were entirely fruitless. The
attitude of the Estates was one of direct opposition to the
king, and they seem from this moment, if not earlier, to have
prepared for an open conflict with the crown. Moravia
being represented at this " General Diet," the Estates at-
tempted to conclude with that country an alliance similar to
the one that already existed between them and the Estates
of Silesia. These negotiations were unsuccessful, as no
agreement could be arrived at on the old standing question
as to the constitutional relationship of Moravia to Bohemia.
The Diet, probably contrary to the king's wishes, also turned
its attention to the national question, which the religious
troubles had recently thrown into the background. Special
enactments were framed to favour the Bohemian language,
as against the use of German or other foreign tongues. The
Bohemian language was also by vote of the Estates declared
to be the " authorized " official language of the country.

Matthew was well advanced in years when he obtained the
Bohemian crown ; and being, like his brother Rudolph,
childless, he was soon obliged to take into consideration the
succession to the Bohemian throne. It was at that period
still an unsettled question whether the crown was hereditary.
In Bohemia — as in Hungary — the princes of the Habsburg
dynasty had several times obtained the coronation of their
heirs during their lifetime, thus avoiding a contest when the
crown became vacant. This was now Matthew's object.
As his two surviving brothers were also childless, he resolved
with their consent to nominate the next heir, Archduke
Ferdinand of Styria, to be his successor.

The Diet, which was to decide the momentous question as
to the succession, met at Prague on June 5, 161 7. That
Matthew knew well the difficulty of gaining his object is
shown by the attempts at intimidation made by the high
burgrave, Adam, Lord of Sternberg. The burgrave, before
the sittings of the Diet commenced, had requested all the
more important State officials and councillors to appear at
his apartments on the Hradcany. With the exception of

240 Bohemia

Count Thurn, who held the office of Burgrave of the
Karlstein, they all accepted the invitation. Sternberg read
to them the royal message, requesting the recognition of
Ferdinand's right of succession to the throne ; he added
that the king was firmly resolved to enforce the succession
of Ferdinand, and it would therefore be better for them to
accept the royal decision peacefully and willingly, and thus
secure their future king's favour, rather than exasperate him
by futile opposition.^

The officials, and subsequently the whole body of the
Estates, for the moment fell in with Sternberg's views, and
Thurn was almost alone in opposing King Matthew's
project. He asserted that the Estates had the right of
electing the future king, and suggested that Ferdinand
should be "elected," instead of "recognized" as King of
Bohemia ; he further contested the validity of any vote as
to the succession which was taken in the absence of dele-
gates from Moravia and Silesia. Finally, the Estates,
against the two votes of Thurn and Colonna of Fels,
" recognized " Ferdinand as King of Bohemia. Ferdinand
then confirmed all the privileges of the land — among which
the Letter of Majesty was specially mentioned — and he was
crowned as king with great solemnity on June 19, 161 7.

After Ferdinand's election, and under his influence, the
policy of Matthew became more aggressive towards the
Protestants; in fact, his object was now undoubtedly
the extirpation of Protestantism. Immediately after they
had secured temporary freedom by the Letter of Majesty,
the Lutherans and Bohemian Brethren had come to an
agreement by which the new appointments to the Consistory
Council were equitably divided between the two sections
of the party. This agreement on so important a matter
naturally strengthened the Protestants, and therefore greatly
disappointed the Romanist clergy. The Jesuits in particular
had previously stated that "the Calvinists and Lutherans
were so opposed to one another that the Roman Catholics
had good hope to see their devilish craft perish through
their own machinations, and to see the heretics destroy each
other." 2

The Jesuit advisers of Ferdinand openly declared that the
present moment was a "golden opportunity for extirpating
>the heretics." The menacing tone of the Roman clergy

^ Gindely. ^ Dr. Soltl, Der Religionskrieg in Deutschland,

An Historical Sketch 241

naturally caused grave apprehensions in Bohemia; and the
alarm was intensified by numerous Protestant refugees from
Ferdinand's territory who had sought refuge in Bohemia,
and who vividly described the persecution which they had
endured.

The growing alarm and resentment of the Protestants
increased when it became known that Count Thurn, who
was a strong Protestant, had, probably in consequence of
his vote on the question of the succession, been dismissed
from his high office of Burgrave of the Karlstein. Though
another less lucrative office was conferred on the count, his
dismissal caused great indignation. The archives, and with
them the documents confirming the privileges of the king-
dom, were preserved at Karlstein : it was believed that the
Government wished to place the custody of these valuable
documents in the hands of some more pliant official.

Archduke Ferdinand and his councillors, in fact, deter-
mined to establish the "Catholic Reformation" in Bohemia
as soon as circumstances permitted. King Matthew, who
was more moderate in his views, was in failing health, so
that the accession of Ferdinand might be shortly anticipated.
On the other hand, the number and influence of the
Bohemian Protestants rendered it certain that they would
not submit to coercion as peacefully as their co-religionists
in Styria had done. Civil war in Bohemia was therefore
inevitable, and the smallest spark would suffice to produce
an explosion.

Immediately after the publication of the Letter of
Majesty, the Protestant citizens of the towns of Broumov
and Hrob had began to build churches ; the last-named town
formed part of the domains of the Roman Archbishop of
Prague, while the former was subject to the Abbot of Breznov.
Encouraged by the Protestant Estates, the citizens proceeded
with the building of these churches, disregarding the
remonstrances of the two ecclesiastics. The question as to
their right to do so has been already alluded to, and from
recently-adduced evidence it now appears certain that the
citizens had right on their side.^ The archbishop and the
abbot had from the first protested against the erection of
these churches, but it was only after Ferdinand's coronation
that they resorted to more energetic measures. In December
(16 1 7) the Archbishop of Prague caused the Protestant
1 See note 3, p. 235.

242 Bohemia

church at Hrob to be totally destroyed, while the abbot was
satisfied with closing that at Broumov. This event, as was
inevitable, was immediately brought to the knowledge of the
'* Defenders," to whom the Letter of Majesty had specially
committed the protection of the interests of the Protestants.
Previous attempts to remonstrate with the officials of King
Matthew had convinced the " Defenders " that no redress
could be obtained from them. They therefore decided to
convoke a General Assembly of the Protestants. The
Agreement of 1609 had empowered them, if necessary, to
invite the Protestants to such meetings. This Assembly
first met on March 5, 16 18, and the knights and nobles
were present in great numbers, while only a few representa-
tives of the towns had the courage to appear. The State
officials had, in fact, used all their influence on the towns-
men to dissuade them from attending the meeting. On
March 6, Count Thurn delivered a lengthy statement to the
Assembly, in which he enumerated the grievances of the
Protestants, specially alluding to the events at Hrob and
Broumov. After a debate that continued for several days,
it was decided to address a remonstrance to the Government
officials at Prague; should this remonstrance prove in-
effective, the Protestants resolved to bring their grievances
directly before Matthew, who then resided at Vienna. The
State officials gave an immediate answer : they declined to
afford any redress whatever. The Assembly now voted an
address to the king, reiterating their grievances, and then
broke up ; but not before they had agreed to meet again on
May 21, by which date it was considered that an answer
would be received from Vienna.

The king's answer arrived sooner than was expected. His
message, drawn up according to the advice of his favourite,
Cardinal Khlesl, was of a most uncompromising character.
Matthew, without entering into the discussion of the alleged
grievances, declared that he would not permit a new meeting
of the Protestants. He further stated that his forbearance
was at an end, and threatened with legal proceedings those
who had caused disturbances. This, not unnaturally, was
considered as a menace to all who had taken part in the
proceedings of the Protestant Assembly. It is needless to
state that this answer, which was handed to the "Defenders"
by Matthew's representatives at Prague, caused general
excitement among the Protestants. The burgrave and the

An Historical Sketch 243

other officials who governed in Matthew's name, when
transmitting the royal message to the "Defenders," sum-
moned them to obey the wishes of their king, and to
countermand the intended Assembly. The " Defenders "
demanded a delay of three days before returning an answer.
They then replied that the new meeting was to take place in
conformity with the decision of the Protestants during their
former Assembly. They stated that they had no power to
annul that decision. When this answer reached Vienna,
the sovereign sent a second message to the Bohemian
Estates, couched in more moderate language. He, however,
adhered to his prohibition of the intended meeting. The
"Defenders" forwarded a second answer, identical in its
terms with their former statement.

The Protestants had already begun to reassemble at
Prague. They were even more numerous than at the
previous meeting, and most of the towns had this time sent
representatives. The leaders of the movement met on May
1 8, a few days before the date fixed for the general Assembly,
at the Carolinum, which now became the centre of the
national movement. It was decided that an appeal should
be addressed to the Bohemian people, and pubUcity given
to it by means of the (Protestant) clergy of Prague. As
proposed, this proclamation was read out in all the Protes-
tant parish churches of Prague on the following Sunday,
It stated that the " Defenders " had received positive
intelligence that certain persons in the kingdom intended
to destroy peace and unity, to oppress the Christian religion
by various artifices, to close and destroy the churches, and
abolish religious liberty. They (the " Defenders ") had
informed the sovereign of this, but had been wrongly
accused by their adversaries of hostile intentions with
regard to his Majesty ; and they solemnly protested against
this calumnious assertion. The faithful were finally exhorted
to pray to God that He might dispose the sovereign's mind
favourably towards the Bohemians, and to the confusion of
their own and the king's enemies. This appeal, while
sparing the king himself, was a direct attack on his council-
lors, and particularly on the Burgrave of the Karlstein,
Jaroslav of Martinic, and the chief judge, William of
Slavata. These two officials, both staunch adherents of the
Roman Church, were special objects of suspicion, as having
influenced the king unfavourably towards their countrj'men.

244 Bohemia

The Protestant Assembly met again at the Carolinum on
May 21, as had been settled. As soon as the proceedings
had commenced, Government messengers appeared request-
ing the attendance of the Protestants at the castle. When
they arrived at the Hradcany another royal message, for-
bidding their meetings, was read to them. They none the
less again met on the following day to discuss the answer.
The answer had already been drawn up by the " Defenders,"
and it was decided to present it on the following day.
Thurn declared that it would be advisable not to choose a
deputation for this purpose, and suggested that the whole
Assembly should proceed in full armour to the Hradcany,
and he alleged without hesitation that a small deputation
would not be safe in the castle. The isolated position of
the Hradcany rendered it possible that once inside of its
extensive buildings a few individuals would be entirely at
the mercy of the well-armed royal body-guards, who could,
by closing the gates of the castle, prevent all attempts to
bring aid to the delegates if they were assailed. Thurn 's
proposal was accepted, and the Government officials gave
permission that the nobles should appear in the palace in
full armour.

It is more than probable that the momentous event of
the morrow, known as the Defenestration, was planned
on this day (May 22) by Thurn and his adherents. Thurn
had undoubtedly arrived at the conclusion that the moment
was a favourable one for the Bohemians to begin the
inevitable struggle. The much-discussed question whether
he was influenced by personal ambition or zeal for the
Protestant religion, or — as is most probable — by both
motives combined, is of comparatively slight importance.
The indignation of the Bohemians had reached the highest
pitch, and the increasing influence of the Jesuits had as yet
succeeded in bringing about but few defections from the
ranks of the Protestant nobility. Thurn may also have
thought it preferable to encounter the weak government of
Matthew rather than the energy of a religious enthusiast
like Ferdinand ; for it was certain that that prince would
soon succeed to the Bohemian throne. An open act of
violence against the officials would also, by compromising
the whole Protestant nobility, force the waverers to take
part in a general uprising.

Thurn and some of his more immediate adherents —

An Historical Sketch 245

among whom were two nobles of the Kinsk)^ and two of the
Ridan family, Colonna of Fels and Venceslas of Ruppa —
met on that day at the Smificky palace. After some dis-
cussion, in the course of which Ulrich of Kinsk^ proposed
that the officials should be poniarded in the council-room,
it was decided that the two most hated of the royal council-
lors, Martinic and Slavata, should be thrown from the
windows of the Hrad^any.^ It may be noted that it was
an old Bohemian usage to punish traitors by this form of
death.

Early on the morning of the memorable 23rd of Maj',
the representatives of Protestantism in Bohemia proceeded
to the Hradcin ; all were in full armour, and most of them
were followed by one or more retainers. They first pro-
ceeded to the hall where the Estates habitually met. The
address to the king which the " Defenders " had prepared
was here read out. It protested both against the attempt
to prevent the meeting, and against the threat of legal pro-
ceedings. The address ended with the significant question,
what part the king's councillors at Prague had had in the
composition of the menacing message which had been for-
warded from Vienna. The Protestants now proceeded to
the hall in which the king's councillors were awaiting them.
Of these, only the high burgrave, Adam of Sternberg,
Martinic, Slavata, and Diepold of Lobkowitz were present.
Paul of Rican read out the address to the king, and a very
stormy discussion took place. The officials, especially
Martinic and Slavata, were violently accused of having,
through their evil counsels, instigated King Matthew against
their own countrymen. The fact that these two officials
alone of all the Bohemian nobles had refused to sign the
Letter of Majesty was recalled as a proof of their treachery.
At last Paul of Rican, again acting as spokesman, read
out a declaration which he had previously prepared. It
stated that Martinic and Slavata were to be considered as
violators of the Letter of Majesty and enemies to the Com-
monwealth. The Protestants, questioned by Rican, loudly
assented to his declaration. This sealed the fate of the
two councillors. The burgrave's entreaties to spare them

^ It is curious to note that Wallenstein is alleged to have said that
the greatest foUy the Bohemians had committed had been to thiow
Martinic and Slavata out of a window instead of thrusting a sword
through their bodies.

246

Bohemia

were fruitless. He was himself forced to leave the room.
Diepold of Lobkowitz, who attempted to assist Martinic
and Slavata, was also induced to retire by his cousin
William of Lobkowitz, one of the Protestant leaders.
Slavata was now seized by Thurn and Martinic by William
of Lobkowitz. Aided by other nobles, Thurn and Lobko-
witz gradually forced the two councillors nearer to the wall,
and after a short struggle threw them from two adjoin-
ing windows into the moat below. Fabricius, the secretary
of the Royal Council, who was unknown to the nobles,
having attempted to remonstrate with them, was also
thrown from the windows of the castle. To those who
know the scene of this drama (little changed at the present
day), it seems well-nigh marvellous that they should all
three have escaped almost without injury.^ When the
nobles who were watching them from the windows above
noticed that they moved, numerous shots were fired at
them, but with little result; Martinic only was slightly
wounded. Aided by their servants, Martinic and Slavata
succeeded in making their escape, and eventually in leaving
Prague in safety.

Immediately after the Defenestration — an event memor-
able not only in Bohemia but in European history, for it
marks the beginning of the Thirty Years' War — the Bohe-
mians established what may be called a provisional
Government consisting of thirty " Directors," chosen (as
the " Defenders " had been) in equal proportions by the
three Estates. Venceslas of Ruppa, one of the ablest of
the Bohemian nobles, became president of this body.
Thurn contented himself with the command of the army.
His foreign origin and particularly his insufficient knowledge
of the national language — which has already been noted —
undoubtedly rendered it impossible for him to attempt to
obtain a more prominent position. No movement uncon-
nected with their national aspirations has ever carried away
the whole mass of the Bohemian people. It was only by a
general uprising that the new Government could hope to
resist the inevitable attack of its enemies.

The new Government from the first displayed consider-
able diplomatic activity. Despatches, expressed in nearly

^ The pious Romanists afterwards attributed their escape to a
miracle. The height of the windows from the ground is about forty
feet.

An Historical Sketch 247

identical terms, were sent to the princes of Germany, the
Kings of England and France, the Republic of Venice, the
Duke of Savoy, and others. These despatches all affirmed
the complete loyalty of the Bohemians to the " Emperor
Matthew their king," and a detailed account was given of
the provocations the Protestants had endured. It was
strongly represented that the violation of the Letter of
Majesty and of the contemporaneous Agreement signed in
1609 had forced the Protestants to rise up in arms. The
entire responsibility for the troubles was thrown on the
order of the Jesuits, who were accused of having stirred up
domestic strife in Bohemia.

It is a proof of the strong feeling against the Jesuits then
prevalent in Bohemia, that one of the first acts of the new
Government was a decree ordering their expulsion (June i,
j6i8). The enumeration of the reasons for this decree
bears a singular resemblance to the accusations which were
brought forward against that Order at the time of its sup-
pression by Clement XIV in the eighteenth century. The
Jesuits were accused of " desiring to subdue all the
kingdoms and lands of the world to their yoke and power ;
of having even employed artifices to incite the potentates
of the world one against the other ; and especially of
having, in countries where various religions existed, stirred
up strife among the Estates." It was further said that " the
Jesuits instigated the authorities against the subjects and
the subjects against the authorities; that they had em-
powered ' parricides ' to murder kings and the anointed of
the Lord who refused to act contrary to their God and in
accordance with their (the Jesuits') counsels ; that they had
promised these criminals eternal salvation and freedom
from the pains of purgatory ; that they had by means of
confession obtained knowledge of many family secrets ;
also they had, 'exemplo templariorum,' become owners of
vast estates ; and finally, that they had openly preached
that no faith need be kept with heretics," ^ At the same
moment the Romanist Archbishop of Prague and the
1 Abbot of Bfenov were also ordered to quit Bohemia.
\ The Jesuits, shortly after their expulsion, published a
> written defence. They stated that it was impossible that
different religions should be tolerated in the same country ;
that they could not spread the Catholic faith without
^ I quote from a MS. copy preserved in the State Archives at Venice.

248

Bohemia

incurring the hatred of their opponents, and that it was
their endeavour, for the greater honour of God, to reduce
all Christianity and the whole world to the obedience
of the Pope.

While this literary contest was being waged, the
" Directors " began to equip an army to meet the coming
attack. They succeeded in raising a force of 16,000 men,
but the want of an efficient commander was much felt
already. The new Government was, on the whole, very
favourably received by the country, which was then almost
entirely Protestant. The towns of Budejovice and Plzefi
alone maintained their allegiance to King Matthew.

The news of the Defenestration reached Matthew at
Vienna while King Ferdinand was temporarily absent at
Presburg, where he was anxious to secure his coronation
as King of Hungary. Matthew, now entirely under the
influence of Cardinal Khlesl, at first inclined to a peaceful
policy. He had, during his struggle against his brother,
been on terms of intimacy with Zerotin, the leader of the
Moravian nobility, and a member of the Church of the
Bohemian Brethren. It was not impossible that that noble,
a staunch adherent of the house of Habsburg, might offer
his services as mediator, particularly as Moravia had not
yet declared for the new Government at Prague. Ferdi-
nand, however, had from the first seen that war alone could
finally decide the long contest between the king and the
Estates of Bohemia. He also saw that if Bohemia were
conquered by force of arms, the pledges of religious liberty
reluctantly given at the moment of his coronation would
become void. With the approval of the Emperor Matthew's
brother, the Archduke Maximilian, Ferdinand caused
Cardinal Khlesl to be forcibly removed from the Imperial
court at Vienna, and the war-party was now in the ascend-
ant. The Emperor entrusted the entire management of
the Bohemian war to his cousin. As generals, Ferdinand
chose Bouquoi and Dampierre, who by long service with
the Spanish armies in the Netherlands had acquired a
thorough knowledge of war.

Towards the end of July (1618) the Imperial forces —
about 12,000 men — coming from Moravia and Austria,
crossed the Bohemian frontier at several points. Their
leaders, Bouquoi and Dampierre, effected a junction at
Nemecky Brod on September 9. The first news of the

An Historical Sketch 249

entry of the Austrian troops into the country caused a panic
at Prague. The military reputation of the Imperial generals
was well known in the country, while the Bohemian com-
manders— with the possible exception of Thurn — were little
trusted by their soldiers. The slow advance of the Imperial-
ists, however, partially restored confidence in Bohemia,
where the Government now called the whole able-bodied
population to arms.

The Bohemians were not without aid from abroad.
Charles Emanuel, Duke of Savoy, while at war with Spain,
had employed a force of German mercenaries under the
command of Ernest of Mansfeld, a natural son of Prince
Mansfeld. These troops were returning to Germany after
the conclusion of peace with Spain, when the Duke of
Savoy received letters from the Bohemian provisional Govern-
ment, announcing the revolution that had taken place and
requesting aid. The duke (who already entertained that
feeling of hostility to the Habsburg dynasty which was till
recently characteristic of the pohcy of the house of Savoy)
immediately realized the importance of the events at Prague.
He decided to use them for the purpose of achieving the
downfall of the Austrian power. He despatched a message
to Mansfeld, who was then marching his troops through
Switzerland, to say that he would retain half of Mansfeld's
mercenaries in his pay, on condition of their immediately
proceeding to Bohemia, to aid the new Government. Duke
Charles Emanuel had already formed the plan — to which
further reference will be made — of obtaining the crown of
Bohemia : but he still wished his scheme to remain secret.
It was therefore agreed between him and Mansfeld that
Christian of Anhalt, the most determined of the German
enemies of the house of Habsburg, the Elector Palatine
Frederick, then leader of the German Protestants, and the
Margrave of Anspach should alone be informed of the
Duke's designs.

Mansfeld's troops arrived in Bohemia in September (i6i 8),
and immediately proceeded to besiege Plzen, one of the
few Bohemian towns that had remained faithful to King
Matthew. Thurn had meanwhile assumed supreme com-
mand of the Bohemian forces. After a futile attempt on
the part of Zerotin, the leader of the Moravian Protestants,
to mediate between the contending parties, the Bohemians
assumed the offensive ; they had also been strengthened ly

I 2

250 Bohemia

the levies from Silesia and Lusatia, both which countries
now recognized the new Government at Prague,

Bouquoi, the leader of the Imperial troops, did not con-
sider his army sufficiendy strong to resist the now more
numerous forces of Thurn. He therefore retreated south-
ward. His retiring forces were defeated by the Bohemians
at Pelhfimov and more decisively at Lomnice, three (German)
miles from Budejovice. Bouquoi was obliged to seek a
refuge within that, then fortified, city. Leaving only a small
force to oppose Bouquoi, the Bohemians crossed the Austrian
frontier (November 25, 16 18), hoping to find allies among
the Protestant nobles, then in a large majority in the land.
The lateness of the season and the state of the roads rendered
this expedition a failure, and the Bohemians took up their
winter quarters in their own country. Before the then
customary temporary cessation of hostilities Mansfeld had
succeeded in obtaining possession of the town of Plzen on
November 21, after a siege of two months.

The Bohemians had, on the whole, been successful during
the campaign of the year 1618, but that success was not in
the end advantageous to their cause. Thinking that victory
had already been secured, many soldiers returned to their
homes. This was to a large extent the result of the faulty
military organization. The soldiers received their pay and
their rations from the towns and nobles who had enrolled
them. These, therefore, from motives of economy sanctioned
the return of their soldiers as soon as immediate danger
appeared no longer to threaten the land. " From the
beginning of the war financial difficulties arose which con-
stantly increased, and caused almost more harm to the
(Bohemian) movement than did the enemy." ^

Before hostilities recommenced, the political situation
changed completely through the death of the Emperor
Matthew (March 20, 16 19). The necessary consequence
was the choice of a new Emperor, and the fate of Bohemia
largely depended on the result of that election.

The Bohemian throne also became practically vacant; for
though Ferdinand's right to succeed his cousin had been
recognized, yet his openly avowed hostility to Protestantism
could hardly fail to alienate the Bohemian people, in spite
of the validity of his claim to the throne. Matthew's death
was not unexpected, and negotiations as to the succession
* Gindely.

An Historical Sketch 251

had taken place during the previous winter. The young
Elector Palatine Frederick was at that moment the leader
of the German Protestants, a term which was then practically
synonymous with hostility to the house of Hal)sburg. His
father, who had died when he was only fourteen years of age,
had already — under the influence of the talented Christian
of Anhalt — rendered himself conspicuous as a supporter of
the Bohemian Protestants during the troubles which pre-
ceded the granting of the Letter of Majesty. Ever since
Frederick's marriage with Elizabeth, the daughter of King
James I of England, his councillors had suggested to him
that a young prince of so great influence, the son-in-law of a
powerful king, should endeavour to obtain the crown of one
of the elective kingdoms. Bohemia and Poland were alluded
to, but the former country only was from the first seriously
taken into consideration.^ In 1615 Frederick visited the
Upper Palatinate, of which district Christian of Anhalt was
then governor as representative of Frederick. During their
interviews the old enemy of the house of Habsburg un-
doubtedly urged his master to persevere in those ambitious
schemes, which were also supported by the Electress Eliza-
beth. As early as July 161 8, we read that Count Albert
Solms visited Bohemia on a mission entrusted to him by
the Elector Palatine ; he then had already promised help to
the Bohemians, and perhaps suggested the eventuality of
Frederick's election as king.

The Elector seems at all events at first to have realized
the necessity of securing allies before he encountered the
enmity of the powerful house of Habsburg. Shortly after
the death of King Matthew, Frederick despatched Christian
of Anhalt to the court of Turin, where Duke Charles
Emanuel had already shown himself favourable to the
Bohemian cause. That prince, however, did not appear
as much inclined to join a confederacy against Austria as
Anhalt had expected. Being himself desirous of obtaining
the Bohemian crown, it was not his interest to encourage
the ambition of Frederick. Anhalt was at last obliged to
offer the Bohemian crown to the Duke of Savoy, suggesting
that his master should content himself with the districts in the
neighbourhood of the Rhine which belonged to the house

^ Dr. Sold, Elizabeth Stuart: Gemahlin Friedrich V von der Pfalz.
Djt. Soltl quotes from a contemporary manuscript.

252 Bohemia

of Habsburg;^ since these lands, situated nearer to the
Palatinate than Bohemia, would be even more valuable to
the Elector. The duke, however, still received Anhalt's
proposals coldly. He made his support of the German
Protestants conditional on the approval of the Elector's
father-in-law, King James of England. That sovereign had
little real sympathy with the Protestant cause. The English
ambassadors on the Continent, however, appear to have
been carried away by their own Protestant zeal, and to have
adopted an attitude more favourable to the Protestants of
Germany than their instructions warranted.^ It is certain
that Anhalt succeeded in persuading the Duke of Savoy, at
least for a time, that King James approved of the ambitious
plans of his son-in-law. Hopes were also entertained that
the Republic of Venice, which had recently been at war
with the Archduke Ferdinand of Styria, and which was on
terms of friendship with the Elector Palatine,^ would join
the enemies of the house of Habsburg.

Anhalt at last succeeded in bringing the Duke of Savoy
to his views, and a treaty of alliance was signed at Rivoli
(May 1619). "I'he Duke of Savoy pledged himself to
prevent the passage of Spanish troops through his territory
on their way to Germany and Bohemia, and promised a
monthly subsidy of 10,000 ducats to the confederacy of the
Protestant German princes, known as the " Union," of
which Frederick was leader. The Elector Palatine, on the
other hand, promised to send an army of 10,000 men to the
aid of the Bohemian Protestants, and to use all his influence
in favour of the election of the Duke of Savoy to the
Bohemian throne. Anhalt left Italy immediately after the
signature of this treaty ; but both parties seem almost from
the first to have regretted it, and it remained entirely in-
operative. The Elector Palatine deplored the sacrifice of
his hopes on the Bohemian crown, and continued secretly
to intrigue in favour of his own candidature. The Duke of
Savoy, when he saw that England would not join the alliance
against the house of Habsburg, began to fear the enmity of

^ This referred to the Breisj^^au and some adjoining districts — now-
forming parts of Baden and Wuitemburg.

2 See Gindely, Geschichte des Dreissigjdhrigen Krieges.

' The Venetian archives contain numerous letters addressed by
Frederick of the Palatinate to the Doges Antonio Priuli and Francesco
Contaiini (1618-1624), requesting financial aid.

An Historical Sketch 253

Austria, though he did not immediately renounce his preten-
sions to the Bohemian throne, A large party, especially
among the German Protestants of Bohemia, wished to choose
as king, John George, Elector of Saxony ; there were, there-
fore, no less than three candidates to the throne besides
Ferdinand, who (in contradistinction to his rivals) founded
his claim on his previous election and coronation during
the reign of King Matthew.

Ferdinand's attitude from the first proves that he was
thoroughly aware of the impossibility of gaining the Bohemian
crown otherwise than by force of arms. He declared, indeed,
that he would keep the promises he had made at his corona-
tion, but he confirmed in their offices the councillors
formerly appointed by Matthew, whom the Estates had
driven from Prague after the occurrence of the Defenes-
tration. He thus impliedly branded the "Directors" as
usurpers. The continuation of the war w^as therefore in-
evitable. Hostilities were resumed in the spring (1619), as
soon as the state of the weather permitted of it. Count
Thurn, at the head of a Bohemian army, entered Moravia,
where not only the Catholics, but also a considerable party
among the Protestants, were opposed to the new Govern-
ment at Prague. This party, headed by Zerotin, attributed
the revolutionary movement in Bohemia to the personal
ambition of its leaders, and not to their zeal for the Pro-
testant creed. But on the whole public opinion in Moravia
was not unfavourable to the provisional Government. Both
at Jihlava, the frontier town, and at Znoymo, Thurn's troops
were enthusiastically received, and the greater part of the
nobility declared itself in his favour. The Estates of
Moravia at their meetings at Brno in May 16 19 decided
that the country should, similarly to Bohemia, be governed
provisionally by a body of thirty "Directors"; of these
twelve were to be chosen by the nobles, twelve by the
knights, and six by the representatives of the towns. The
all-important question of the choice of a new sovereign was
deferred to a " General Diet " of the lands of the Bohemian
crown, which it was settled should shortly meet at Prague.

The easy success of Thurn's expedition to Moravia
induced the " Directors " at Prague to instruct him to
advance into Austria. This is perhaps the one moment
when a successful result of the Bohemian national move-
ment was not impossible. The strong Romanist tendencies

254 Bohemia

of P'erdinand, already known through his " Catholic Reforma-
tion " of Styria, had from the first alienated the nobles of
Upper and Lower Austria against their new sovereign. In
Vienna, where Ferdinand took up his residence after the
death of his cousin Matthew, the presence of the sovereign,
and of an armed force, restricted the revolutionary move-
ment within limits. At Linz, however, the capital of Upper
Austria, the Estates openly opposed the new ruler, under
the leadership of the Baron of Starhemberg ^nd of Tscher-
nembl, the latter of whom appears to have been a man of
exceptional ability. They entered into an alliance with the
Bohemians, and Starhemberg entreated Thurn to march
into Austria, where he said "he would be received as a
Messiah." Thurn entered Lower Austria in May, and the
news of his approach caused a panic among the Catholics
of Vienna, while it greatly raised the hopes of the Pro-
testants, who were in sympathy with the Bohemians. On
June 5, the leaders of the Austrian Protestants were received
in audience by Ferdinand. They demanded the assurance
of full religious liberty, a considerable increase of the power
of the Estates, and the sovereign's sanction to the alliance
with the Estates of Bohemia which they had already con-
cluded. The interview was at first a very stormy one. It
is said that at the moment when the Protestants had become
most menacing towards Ferdinand, they were reduced to
subserviency by the sudden appearance of Dampierre's
regiment in the court of the palace (the "Burg"). The
arrival of this small reinforcement marks a turning-point in
the fortunes of the campaign. It intimidated the Protestants
of Vienna, who, as the State trials afterwards revealed, had
intended to open the gates to Thurn's army. When that
general appeared before Vienna the following night (June 6),
contrary to his expectation he found the gates closed, and
the fortifications held by troops, while no insurrectionary
movement in the town took place. Ill provided with
artillery, Thurn felt unable to undertake a regular siege, and
he only remained in the neighbourhood of the city up to
June 15. His return to Bohemia was precipitated by the
news that Mansfeld's army had been signally defeated by
the Imperialists • under Bouquoi, at the village of Zablati
in Southern Bohemia. Even after Thurn's return, Bouquoi
continued his victorious advance, and was already menacing
Prague. A mutiny which broke out among the Bohemian

An Historical Sketch 255

mercenary troops at this moment favoured his movements.
It is not improbable that Bohemia would have been subdued
during this campaign had it not in September 1619 been
considered necessary to recall Bouquoi. Gabriel Bethlen,
prince of Transylvania, had conquered a large part of
Hungary, and thus became a rival of Ferdinand, who
claimed the crown of Hungary, a policy pursued by all the
Habsburg princes at this period. He made a sudden attack
on Austria, and arrived close to Vienna, to the defence of
which city Bouquoi and his troops marched with all speed.

The weighty question as to the succession to the Bohe-
mian throne had meanwhile been decided by the " General
Diet," which first met at Prague on July 8. This Diet from
the first assumed the functions of a constituent assembly.
It commenced its proceedings by declaring that Bohemia
was an elective, not an hereditary kingdom. Curiously
enough, a few opinions were expressed in favour of the
repubhcan form of government. It was then resolved (pro-
bably in view of obtaining the support of the dependent
countries) that in the election of a king, Bohemia should
have two votes, Moravia, Silesia, Upper Lusatia, and Lower
Lusatia one vote each. Other constitutional enactments,
subsequently voted, defined and enlarged the powers of the
Estates, and limited those of the future elective king.
" Defenders " were to be chosen in each of the lands of the
Bohemian crown, who were empowered to exercise a supreme
control over the king, and even to organize armed resistance
against him, should he violate the new constitution. This
constitution, which conferred enormous power on the nobles,
and placed beside, rather than above them, a king whose
influence was strictly limited, was not unlike that of Poland
during the last period of its existence as an independent
country. The new constitution was solemnly promulgated
at Prague on July 31, 161 9, but in consequence of the com-
plete collapse of the Bohemian movement in the following
year it may be said never to have come into operation.
After having decided the constitutional question, the Estates
concluded an alliance with the Austrian Protestants, by
which they mutually promised aid in the defence of the
privileges of the Estates and of the Protestant faith. The
next measure that occupied the Bohemian Diet was the
deposition of Ferdinand. As the Estates had established a
constitution, the provisions of which it was certain that the

256

Bohemia

prince would not accept, this was little more than a formal-
ity. The principal accusations against Ferdinand which
were brought forward as justifying his deposition were, that
he had obtained the crown through fraud on the part
of King Matthew, and that he had ill-treated the Protestants
in Styria. It was also said that, should he be accepted as
king, Bohemia would herself become responsible for the
enormous debts which had been incurred in raising the
military forces to subdue the country.^ On August 13, the
nobles, knights, and town representatives of Bohemia de-
clared themselves for the deposition of Ferdinand, and the
deputies of Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia on the following
day concurred in that decision.

The next step was the election of a new king. The
" Directors " wished to carry it out as soon as possible, as it
was known that the election of a new Emperor was shortly
to take place at Frankfurt. It was almost certain that there
the choice would fall on Ferdinand ; and the " Directors "
feared that the result of the election at Frankfurt would
raise the hopes of the Catholics, and intimidate those who
were ready to support the candidate whom the " Directors "
favoured. That that candidate would be the Elector Pala-
tine was by this time almost certain. The Duke of Savoy
liad abandoned his intention of interfering in the affairs of
Bohemia and Germany. It was now evident to him that
King James of England did not intend to aid the Bohemian
Protestants ; and France, the powerful neighbour of Savoy,
contrary to her traditions, was for the moment on terms of
friendship with the house of Habsburg. The candidature of
the Elector of Saxony would have found many supporters
had that prince desired to obtain the Bohemian throne. As
far back as the year 16 14 several disaffected Bohemian nobles
had offered the crown of their country to the Elector;
after the defeat at Zablati they applied to him for aid,
again proposing to elect him as king. But the Elector
entirely discouraged their advances, and refused to abet the

^ The Estates afterwards published their reasons for dethroning Fer-
di'^and in a thick volume (consisting of 394 pages, and an Appendix of
226 pages containing documentary evidence). In this book — entitled
Deduciio dcren Ursachen warum . . . Kaiser Ferdinand des Regi-
vients 171 Bdhmen. . . verlustigt — the question is treated with appalling
thoroughness. Procopius's history, De Bello Gothico, is made to bear
witness against Ferdinand, and we begin the history of Bohemia with
Krokus and Libussa !

An Historical Sketch 257

Bohemians in any way. A rigid Lutheran, the Calvinism of
the majority of the Bohemian Protestants found Uttle
favour in his eyes. Hoe, the Elector's court chaplain, used
his great influence over that prince to the detriment of the
Bohemians. While preaching the Lutheran creed at Prague,
Hoe had been exposed to personal insults on the part of the
Bohemian Calvinists, who finally expelled him from the
country. He had retained a violent hatred for the Bohe-
mians, and Ferdinand's minister at Dresden therefore found
no difficulty, by means of presents, in winning him entirely
to his master's cause. A just appreciation of the political
situation of Europe, at that moment very favourable to the
dynasty of Habsburg, may also have influenced the Elector
in his decision to refuse all aid to the Bohemians. By
offending the powerful house of Austria he imperilled the
electoral dignity which Charles V had transferred to his
branch of the Saxon dynasty.

The date fixed for the election of the new king was
August 26, and an attempt of the Saxon party to protract the
proceedings was frustrated by the efforts of Ruppa, the
president of the " Directors." The election began immedi-
ately, the nobles — thirty-eight in number — first recording
their votes. Justifying his vote in favour of the Elector
Palatine, Ruppa, in an eloquent speech, dilated on the
powerful alliances Frederick would secure to Bohemia. As
such future allies he mentioned England, the Netherlands,
the " Union " of the German Protestant princes, Switzerland,
and Savoy. He also referred to the great wealth of Fred-
erick, saying that it would enable him to give liberal aid to
the Bohemians. Ruppa's speech appears to have made a
great impression, for thirty-four nobles recorded their votes
for the Elector Palatine. The further voting was even more
favourable to that prince. Only three knights gave their
votes to the Elector of Saxony, and the representatives of
the towns unanimously declared for the Elector Palatine.
On the following day the representatives of the dependent
lands also approved the choice of Frederick as king. The
result of the election was immediately made public, contrary,
however, to the wishes of Frederick's envoys, who had
suggested that the election should be kept secret till their
master had given his decision.

Weak and irresolute as he proved himself during his whole
career, Frederick, though pleased at having obtained the

258

Bohemia

long-coveted crown, yet hesitated when the Bohemian am-
bassadors arrived at Amberg to give him formal notice of
his election. He asked the advice of his councillors, Chris-
tian of Anhalt, Camerarius, the court chaplain Schulze, and
he also consulted several princes of the Protestant Union.
Frederick, following the advice of the majority of those
he consulted, at first decided to return an evasive answer,
saying he would only accept the crown when assured of
sufficient aid from his father-in-law, the King of England.
It is now well known that the sympathies of James I
were at that moment entirely with Ferdinand, whom he con-
sidered the legitimate King of Bohemia. If James — and to
a far greater extent some of his ministers — at times seemed
to favour Frederick's plans, this was only done because the
Protestant opinion of England warmly espoused the cause
of the Elector Palatine.

Had Frederick adhered to his first resolution, there is no
doubt that his expedition to Bohemia — equally disastrous
to himself and to the country which he attempted to rule
— would never have taken place. The fact that on the
day following the election of Frederick, Archduke Ferdinand
was unanimously chosen as Emperor by the German electors
(August 28, 1 6 19) should have been a further inducement
to cautious action.

Frederick, however, soon abandoned his first decision.
Christian of Anhalt represented to him that having done
so much to obtain the Bohemian throne, he would incur
lasting disgrace should he now refuse it. The Elector's
ambitious consort, Elizabeth, is said to have exercised her
great influence towards the same end.^ Frederick finally
decided to accept the crown of Bohemia without waiting for
the approval of the King of England. He wrote to inform

^ This is principally stated by Catholic authors of this period, who
surnamed Elizabeth the Helen of Germany, thus indicating that she
Avas the cause of all the calamities which the Thirty Years' War
brought on Germany. In a letter which F21izabeth at this time
nddressed to her husband, who had sought her advice, she said : " As
God directs everything, He had undoubtedly also ordained this "
{i.e. the election). "She therefore left it to her husband to decide
whether he would accept the crown. Should he do so, she was ready
to obey the call of God, to suffer what God might decree, and even if
necessary to sacrifice her jewels and all her worldly possessions." This
letter can hardly be considered as pleading strongly in favour of
Frederick's acceptance of the Bohemian crown.

An Historical Sketch 259

his father-in-law of his decision, and by the beginning of
October it was also known at Prague that Frederick had
accepted the crown. Immediately after this decision
Frederick left Amberg to join the Electress at Heidelberg.
Thence they both started for Bohemia, and reached the
frontier of that country at Waldsassen (near Cheb) on
October 25. The king and queen, as they were henceforth
called, were here received by a deputation composed of
representatives of all the lands of the Bohemian crown.
Count Andrew Slik first welcomed the king, and the
deputation was afterwards received by the queen. Venceslas
of Ruppa, speaking in French, thanked her for having
shown herself friendly to the Bohemian cause, and for
having encouraged her husband to accept the crown.
Speaking in the same language, Elizabeth replied : " What
I have done for the glory of God and for the religion in the
past has been done with good intention on my part, and in
the future also I shall not be wanting in affection and
good-will to you." These words are by most writers con-
sidered as an admission on the part of the queen that she
had persuaded her husband to accept the Bohemian crown.

On October 25 the king and queen continued their
journey, and were enthusiastically received by the nobility
and the people of all the towns through which they passed.

They arrived before Prague on October 31, and were
met at the gates of the city by large deputations of nobles
and citizens. Their solemn entry into Prague took place
on the same day. On November 4 the king, and three
days later the queen, were crowned in the cathedral of
St. Vitus on the Hradcany, Dicastus (the Administrator
of the Protestant Consistory) officiating on both occasions.
The enthusiasm, both of the nobles and of the citizens,
knew no bounds. The winning manners of the king in
particular obtained him great popularity, while his incapacity
and irresolution had not yet been discovered. The fact
that Frederick was ignorant of the Bohemian language —
which he does not seem even to have attempted to acquire
— very soon interfered with his popularity, and the
Bohemians began to speak of their new king as a foreigner.
This designation was still more freely applied to Queen
Elizabeth, who not only was ignorant of the Bohemian
tongue, but whose knowledge of German was also exceed-
ingly limited. A Chinese wall, as Dr. Gindely expresses it,

26o Bohemia

separated her from the Bohemian ladies, few of whom
spoke French, and none English. Her intercourse was
therefore confined to her own maids of honour, most of
whom were English ; and it was believed that in her
conversations with them she spoke of her new home in
a manner that was far from appreciative. The queen thus
gradually became unpopular. The habits of her English
attendants — even the low dresses worn by the ladies of her
court — excited the displeasure of the ladies of Prague.

The " Directors " resigned their office immediately after
the coronation, and it was Frederick's duty now to appoint
the State and court officials. It is a proof how limited the
king's power was, that he was only allowed to choose
among four nominees of the Estates in each case. The
principal dignities were, as natural, conferred on the leaders
of the movement — Budova, Ruppa, Schlick, and William of
Lobkowitz. Thurn was reinstated in his office of Burgrave
of the Karlstein, of which dignity King Matthew had
deprived him. The arrival of King Frederick therefore
but little changed the political position of the Bohemian
nobles, who continued to hold the real power ; though they
hoped by the election of Frederick to obtain foreign aid.
The Bohemians were opposed to all interference on the
part of the German councillors who had accompanied
Frederick. They specially resented the attempts of Camer-
arius — the most able and trusted of the king's councillors — •
to examine the state of the finances of the country, which
had fallen into hopeless disorder. Camerarius rightly fore-
saw that this circumstance, and the consequent impossibility
of paying the troops regularly, would greatly contribute to
the downfall of the new king.

Frederick was from the first confronted by the difficulties
caused by religious strife. He had indeed declared himselt
a friend of religious liberty, and had promised the Catholic
States, for whose aid he still hoped, to refrain from all steps
hostile to the Roman faith ; ^ but the narrow-minded

^ Announcing his coronation to Antonio Priuli, Doge of Venice, on
the day of that event ("In arce nostra Pragensi Die iv. Novembris
1619"), the king says: " Pollicemur autem S.V. nos hac in parte
privatum emolumentum nullum prorsus sed duntaxat afflictorum libera-
tionem ab exterminio et clade publica et libertatis communis patrocinium
ante oculos habere ideoque Religioni Rom?,nae additos non minus quam
Evangelicae professionis premissam illis liheram ubique suae religionis
exercitionem tueri velle" (Stale Archives, Venice).

An Historical Sketch 261

sectarian feeling, common at that period to all religious
creeds, rendered a policy of tolerance an impossibility. On
the advice of Schulze, his court chaplain, Frederick soon
after his coronation caused all the altars and pictures to be
removed from the church of St. Vitus at Prague, the time-
honoured sanctuary of the Bohemian nation. This caused
a general outcry in the whole country. The Bohemian
Brethren, whom Frederick favoured, and whose doctrine
was very similar to that of the Calvinists, were alone in their
approbation of this measure. The Catholic and Lutheran
clergy vied in their denunciations of the sacrilegious king.
Hoe, the Lutheran court chaplain of the Elector of Saxony,
was particularly active in inciting public opinion in Germany,
as well as in Bohemia, against Frederick.

Warfare had meanwhile continued during the months
that immediately preceded and followed the coronation of
Frederick. As stated before, the army of Bouquoi had
retreated from Bohemia in September (1619). During
Count Thurn's presence in the neighbourhood of Vienna in
June a Hungarian embassy had appeared in his camp, and
the foundation was then laid of an alliance between the
Bohemian and the Hungarian Protestants, the leader of
these latter being then Gabriel Bethlen, prince of Transyl-
vania. Following the retreating forces of Bouquoi, Thurn's
army again entered Austria and joined the forces of Bethlen.
An indecisive engagement took place at Ulrichskirchen in
Lower Austria, after which Bouquoi retreated across the
Danube, burning the bridges behind him. A formal alliance
had meanwhile been concluded at Presburg between
Bohemia, Hungary, and Transylvania, and it was decided
that a joint embassy from the three countries should repair
to Constantinople, to request the Sultanas aid against the
Emperor Ferdinand. It was at the same time decided that,
late as the season was, an attempt on Vienna should still be
made. Want of heavy artillery, the mutinous state of the
troops, whose pay was heavily in arrear, and the severity of
the weather would probably have prevented the success
of the enterprise; but early in December Bethlen, whose
army, together with that of Thurn, had arrived before
Vienna a few days previously, received news that the
Hungarian Catholics, aided by Polish troops, had risen in
arms against him ; he therefore (December 5) hastily left
the neighbourhood of Vienna and returned to Hungary.

262 Bohemia

Winter, as usual at that period, now put a temporary stop
to hostilities, and the short respite was employed by both
parties in attempting to secure allies for the struggle of the
following year, which all felt would be decisive. It can be
briefly stated that in these negotiations Ferdinand was
entirely successful, while Frederick's attempt to obtain allies
resulted in complete failure. The spring of the year 1620
found Bohemia almost isolated, while a large part of Europe
was arrayed in arms against her.

First and foremost of the allies of Ferdinand was Philip III,
King of Spain. As mentioned before, Spanish diplomacy ^
had intervened in the affairs of Bohemia in a sense hostile
to the Protestants, during both the reigns of Rudolph and
Matthew. Subsequently, a slight estrangement between the
two branches of the house of Habsburg had taken place.
Philip, on the death of the Emperor Matthew, believed his
own right to Matthew's succession to be superior to that of
Ferdinand.

Through the able diplomacy of Khevenhiiller, Ferdinand's
ambassador at Madrid, this difficulty was soon overcome.
Khevenhiiller strongly urged that the interest of the Roman
Church, menaced by the temporary triumph of the Bohemian
Protestants, preceded all other matters. When the king's
confessor, who possessed great influence over him, raised
some objection to Khevenhiiller's demands for aid for his
master, the ambassador answered him, "that his place in
hell would be deeper than those of Calvin and Luther." ^
Before the beginning of the spring (1620) the ambassador's
efforts were entirely successful. Spain engaged herself to
send a large force to reinforce Bouquoi's army, and also to
subsidize the new Emperor on a large scale. It was further
settled that a Spanish army should invade the Palatinate from
the Netherlands, thus preventing the new King of Bohemia
from receiving any aid from his hereditary dominions.

^ The intervention of Spain in Bohemian affairs may be traced some
way back. Writing from Prague the Venetian ambassador, Vinceruo
Gradenigo, states (Sept. 6, 1588): " Kuischky (Kinsky), held to be a
leading heretic, said the other day that unless they kept their eyes open
they would one day find themselves under Spanish yoke, but that the
German princes had no intention of allowing such a thing to happen to
them, and were on the lookout " (Calendar of State relating to English
affairs, preserved in the Archives of Venice, vol. iii. p. 384. Edited by
Mr. Horatio F. Brown).

2 Gindely.

An Historical Sketch 263

Among the Italian princes, the Pope naturally supported
the cause of the Church of which he v/as the head. He had
sent subsidies to Matthew from the beginning of the Bohemian
revolution, but now that the decisive moment seemed near
he increased his efforts. He imposed a tithe on all Church
property in Italy, and was thus able to forward large sums,
not only to Ferdinand, but also to the " Liga " of German
Catholic princes whose troops, in 1620, invaded Bohemia.
The Grand Duke of Tuscany sent some troops to the aid of
the Emperor Ferdinand, and the Duke of Savoy, whose
policy had completely changed, also offered to assist him
with part of his army.

France did not interfere with armed forces, but the
diplomacy of that power was for the moment decidedly
favourable to the Emperor. The French envoys dissuaded
the Protestant princes of Germany from affording any aid to
the King of Bohemia, and the treaty of Ulm, which sealed
his fate, was principally due to their efforts.

Turning to Northern Europe, Poland had already, by
assisting the Hungarian Catholics in their attack on Bethlen,
afforded aid to Ferdinand. During the winter (16 19-1620)
the Emperor obtained King Sigismund of Poland's per-
mission to enlist a large force of Cossacks on Polish territory.
These savage troops spread general terror among the people
of Austria and Bohemia, to whom they were known as the
"bloodhounds." They specially contributed to the sup-
pression of the Protestant movement in Lower Austria.
The King of Denmark, though a Protestant, disapproved of
Frederick's expedition to Bohemia, and Gustavus Adolphus,
King of Sweden, who appears to have had more sympathy
with the King of Bohemia, would by distance alone have
been prevented from interfering before the speedy collapse
of the Bohemian movement took place. He was also at
that moment at war with Poland.

Far more important than the attitude of any of the Powers
hitherto referred to, was that of the German princes and
towns ; for on that the result of the struggle between the
competitors for the Bohemian crown principally depended.
The German States were at that moment divided into two
confederacies: the "Liga," to which most of the Catholics
belonged, and the " Union," which — with the exception of
Saxony — had been joined by the principal Protestant States.
The heads of the two lines of the House of Wittelsbach,

264

Bohemia

Maximilian, Duke of Bavaria, and Frederick, Elector Pala-
tine, were at that time the chiefs of the rival confederacies.
Though the Bohemians had chosen the leader of the Union
as their king, the Protestant princes, and still more the
Protestant free towns, from the first showed Httle sympathy
for the Bohemian cause. The records of this period are
mostly written from the point of view of religious controversy,
and generally leave other motives in the background. It,
however, appears probable that the hereditary hatred between
Slavs and Germans contributed to preventing the German
Protestants from co-operating with those of Bohemia. The
princes of the Union strongly protested against Frederick's
action in leading some of the troops of the Union to Bohemia.
They even wished to deprive him of his position as head of
their confederacy, alleging that he had by his acceptation
of the Bohemian throne rendered himself unable to perform
the duties attached to that office.

The ability of Duke Maximilian of Bavaria, assisted by
the efforts of the French envoys, was thus enabled to achieve
a diplomatic success, which may be said to have sealed the
fate of Frederick. The new Emperor had after his corona-
tion visited Duke Maximilian at Munich (October 16 19). It
seems probable that at this moment already the Emperor
promised Maximilian, in return for his assistance against
Bohemia, that the dignity of Elector should, after the defeat
of Frederick, be transferred from the Protestant to the
Catholic line of the house of Wittelsbach. It was now only
necessary for Duke Maximilian to acquire the certainty that
his own dominions would not be attacked ; he would then
be able to use against Bohemia the whole strength of the
Catholic " Liga." This result was only obtained after pro-
tracted negotiations, during which Maximilian received great
assistance from the French ambassadors, who were instructed
directly to menace the German Protestants. A treaty was
at last signed at Ulm (July 3, 1620), by Duke Maximilian
on behalf of the Catholic, and by the Elector of Brandenburg
on behalf of the Protestant princes and free towns of
Germany. By this agreement both parties pledged them-
selves not to attack the German lands belonging to the other
party. Bohemia was not included in this treaty, and thus
remained exposed to the attack of the " Liga." The very
fair demand of the Protestants that the Archduke Albert,
governor of the Spanish Netherlands, should undertake not

An Historical Sketch 265

to attack the hereditary domains of the Elector Palatine
was rejected by Maximilian ; he said that the Archduke was
not a member of the " Liga," and that he had no right to
give him orders. The Protestants did not insist, and shortly
afterwards the Archduke Albert sent a Spanish army under
Spinola to the Palatinate. The forces of Frederick were
unable to resist this attack, so it hardly need be mentioned
that the King of Bohemia had no hope of receiving aid from
his hereditary territory.

Almost all the more important Catholic countries, there-
fore, for the moment supported the Emperor, either with
their arms or at least by their diplomatic action. Ferdinand
was also certain of the neutrality of the German Protestant
princes,^ and it was his good fortune even to obtain active
aid from one of the most important of their number, the
Elector of Saxony. It is not easy to account for the policy
of the Elector. A zealous Lutheran, he was strongly op-
posed to the Calvinism of Frederick and the Bohemians ;
the intense dislike for that people which the influential
court chaplain Hoe entertained must also be taken into
account. The feeling that it was the duty of the Electors
to aid their Emperor in retaining the Bohemian crown, now
long connected with the Imperial dignity, together with
jealousy of Frederick's increased power, may also have
influenced the Elector. It is also probable that he enter-
tained hopes of permanently acquiring Lusatia in return for
his services. It is at any rate certain that from the begin-
ning of the year 1620 the Elector of Saxony had cast in
his lot with the Emperor, though it was only towards the
end of the summer that a complete agreement as to a simul-
taneous attack on Bohemia from Austria, Bavaria, and
Saxony was arrived at.

The prospects of the King of Bohemia were very differ-
ent indeed from those of the Emperor. Little hope could
from the first be placed on the Protestant princes of Ger-
many, though the fatal treaty of Ulm was only signed in
July. The only aid the Bohemians could seriously rely on
was that of the Protestant nobles of Lower and Upper
Austria, and that of Gabriel Bethlen, Prince of Transyl-

^ They were not precluded from aiding Frederick in Bohemia by the
treaty of Ulm, which had left that country entirely outside the sphere
of its stipulations ; it was, however, clear to Ferdinand that no such
intervention would take place.

266 Bohemia

vania, who at that moment had obtained possession of a
considerable part of Hungary. Bethlen had, in January
{1620), concluded a truce with Ferdinand on terms very
favourable to himself. The Emperor had temporarily sanc-
tioned his occupation of the Hungarian districts which he
had acquired. Bethlen's suggestion that Bohemia should
be included in the truce was, however, rejected. The Prince
of Transylvania, fortunately for the Bohemians, soon broke
the truce, and as early as March (1620) renewed his alliance
with them ; a small Hungarian force, indeed, remained
with the Bohemian armies up to the final downfall in
November.

The Bohemians to the end hoped for aid from Turkey.
They had, together with the Hungarians, sent an embassy
to Constantinople in the autumn of 16 19, and shortly after-
wards Mehemed Aga was sent by the Sultan to Prague to
congratulate King Frederick on his election, and to promise
him aid from Turkey. The Sultan was, however, at this
moment engaged in war in Asia ; besides, he probably
thought the struggle would be a prolonged one, and rightly
judged that the weakening of the countries of Eastern and
Central Europe could but favour his own plan of an advance
westward. Towards the end of the summer (1620) another
Bohemian embassy started for Constantinople, but only
arrived there on November 27, nineteen days after the
battle of the "White Mountain."

From the many allies whom the Bohemians believed
they would gain through the election of Frederick little or no
aid was obtained. Foremost among these imaginary allies
was, of course. King James of England. Want of space
renders it impossible to notice the very curious remarks
which recent writers have made concerning the action of
English diplomacy in Germany and Bohemia at this period.
It appears certain that the envoys of King James, contrary
to their instructions, and in consequence of their zeal for
the Protestant cause, acted in a manner more favourable
to King Frederick than their master desired. King James
always declined to abet his son-in-law in his attempt to
seize Bohemia, but he reluctantly consented to pay a
subsidy to him for the defence of the Palatinate. An
English envoy was sent to Brussels to dissuade Archduke
Albert from invading the hereditary domains of the Elector
Palatine. Up to the moment that the troops of Spinola

An Historical Sketch 267

had entered the Palatinate the English Government was
assured that no such intention existed. King James became
the " laughing-stock and plaything of the Catholic powers."

The Netherlands — where Frederick afterwards took refuge
— afforded as much aid to the king during his short reign as
was in their power. Precluded by their geographical situa-
tion from any armed intervention, they to the last sent him
subsidies, though, irritated by the cold, not to say hostile,
attitude of King James, they occasionally threatened to
withdraw their help should the King of England entirely
abandon his son-in-law.

The Republic of Venice was also one of the States on
whose aid the credulous Bohemians had relied. King
Frederick and the Estates were incessant in their applica-
tions for financial help from the Republic. No such help
ever seems to have been afforded, and the speedy termination
of the war would in any case have rendered it fruitless.^

During the one winter in which he ruled Bohemia, Frederick
was not entirely unsuccessful in securing the affection of his
new subjects. A certain feeling of attachment to the new
dynasty arose. When the queen (Dec. 26, 1619) gave birth
to her third son. Prince Rupert, afterwards so prominent in
English history, the people of Prague cordially joined in the
festivities which took place at court on the occasion of this
event. In February (1620) the new king visited Moravia
and Silesia. Both at Brno and at Breslau he was enthusias-
tically received, so that it appeared as if all the lands of the
Bohemian crown were united in their devotion to the new
ruler.

By this time hostilities had already recommenced. On the
retreat of the Hungarian forces from the neighbourhood of
Vienna the Bohemians had also retired. The Bohemian
troops remained in the part of Lower Austria nearest to the
frontier of their country. The Moravians took up their
winter quarters in the Moravian districts adjoining Austria,
while the Silesians for a time separated from the rest of the

^ One of these letters addressed to Doger Priuli, begging that he
would aid the Bohemians, '* ad usum belli hujus insigni aliqua pecuniae
summa pro qua sufficientissimam cautionem Serenitati Vestrae ac
inclytae isti Reipublicae praestare parati sumus," is dated from Prague
as late as October 20, 1620. Frederick had then already left for the
seat of war, and the letter is signed by the " Serenissimi Regis Bohemiae
Consiliarii ac Supremi ejusdem Regni Ofiiciales" (State Archives,
Venice).

268 Bohemia

army. During the winter a small force, raised by the
Austrian Protestants, joined the Bohemian army in Lower
Austria. The first engagement between the Imperialists under
Bouquoi and the Bohemians took place (in February) near
I^ngenlois, in Lower Austria ; the troops of Ferdinand were
entirely successful. Soon afterwards Prince Christian of
Anhalt assumed the command of the Bohemian forces, and
the jealousy between him and Thurn^ the former com-
mander, was one of the many causes that contributed to
the speedy downfall of Bohemia. Hostilities of an in-
decisive character continued during spring and summer up
to the moment w^hen the treaty of Ulm and the Saxon
declaration in favour of Ferdinand rendered a combined
attack on Bohemia possible.

As soon as the treaty of Ulm had guaranteed to Duke
Maximilian of Bavaria the security of his own dominions,
he lost no time in hurrying to the assistance of the
Emperor Ferdinand. His army crossed the frontier of
Upper Austria on July 24, and that country submitted
almost without resistance. The Protestant Estates, not
expecting so rapid an attack, had not sufficiently armed
themselves and were disappointed in their hope of aid
from Bohemia and Hungary. After the submission of
Upper Austria, Maximilian was free to direct his entire
attention to Bohemia, as the Protestant movement in Lower
Austria had also already collapsed. The Protestant nobles
had indeed raised some troops, and they now (August i)
proclaimed Frederick, King of Bohemia, their protector.
They were, however, as ill-prepared for war as the Pro-
testants of Upper Austria, and all resistance on their part was
soon suppressed with the help of the Emperor's Polish mer-
cenaries, whose ferocity and cruelty spread terror through
Lower Austria.

After some deliberation it was settled that the army of the
" Liga " should unite with that of Bouquoi, and that they
then should conjointly invade Bohemia. Before crossing the
frontier, Duke Maximilian addressed a letter to the Estates of
Bohemia, informing them that he had received an Imperial
" patent " authorizing him to invade Bohemia unless the
Estates immediately recognized the authority of Ferdinand,
their legitimate sovereign. The Estates answered (August
30) by a letter, the contents of which would excite more ad-
miration had they not been in such entire contradiction to

An Historical Sketch 269

the attitude of the Bohemian people during the subsequent
short campaign. Returning the Imperial "patent," the
Estates declared that " they would — should an entirely un-
provoked attack be made on them — defend their king, who
had been elected and crowned in accordance with the old
privileges and rights of Bohemia ; and that they would fight
to the utmost for the lands of the Bohemian crown, and for
their beloved country, at the risk of their estates and their
lives ; they therefore confidently entrusted the decision to
the justice of God." On the day he addressed his letter to
the Estates, MaximiHan also wrote to King Frederick, sum-
moning him immediately to leave Bohemia. The king
returned an answer similar to that of the Estates.^ On
September 8 the army of the "Liga" united with that of
Bouquoi in Lower Austria, and the combined forces, cross-
ing the Bohemian frontier (September 20), marched on
Budejovice.

Bouquoi nominally retained his separate command, but
he henceforth played a minor part, as the influence and im-
portance of the Duke of Bavaria were far superior to his.
A few days before (September 13) the troops of the Elector of
Saxony had crossed the frontier of Lusatia, to reduce this
dependency of Bohemia to Ferdinand's rule.

Never was Bohemia less prepared to resist the vast forces
now on the march against her. It would indeed have
required the enthusiasm of the Hussite times to render a
successful defence possible. The Bohemians of this period
were, however, very different from their heroic ancestors.
There was nothing also in the person of the German king
whom they had chosen to carry away the masses as Zizka
and Prokop had done in the days of old. Frederick,
though the charm of his manners secured for him a certain
degree of popularity to which Queen Elizabeth never
attained, soon proved himself utterly deficient as ruler of
the country in a moment of almost unexampled difficulty.
As already noted, the form.er " Directors " had, while aban-
doning that title, retained almost all their former power. At
a moment when a dictator with uncontested authority could
perhaps have saved the country, constant quarrels between
the new German generals, Anhalt and Hohenlohe, and

^ Lontorp (Lontorpius) {Actapublica der Kaiserlichen undzu Hungan
und Bohvien Koniglichen Majestdt weiland Matthiae und Ferdinandiy
162 1 ) prints these four letters.

270 Bohemia

Thurn and Mansfeld, the earlier commanders of the Bo-
hemian forces, took place.

The king's notorious incapacity in military affairs, in
which he had as a youth received no instruction,^ rendered
his position even more hopeless. The military ignorance of
the king was probably one of the reasons why about this
time the supreme direction of the defence of the country
was entrusted to a council of war. Besides the princi-
pal Bohemian statesmen and generals, Baron Tschernembl,
leader of the Protestants of Upper Austria, and General
Hofkirchen, commander of the levies of the Protestant
Estates of Lower Austria, who had sought refuge in
Bohemia, formed part of this council. Tschernembl, aware
of the desperate position of the country, advised desperate
remedies. He demanded that the order calling the whole
male population to arms should be more strictly carried
out, and demanded a great increase of the taxation and
the abolition of serfdom. The latter step, he justly urged,
was absolutely necessary to interest the masses in the de-
fence of their country. These proposals, obviously opposed
to the landed interest, and therefore to the wishes of the
great Bohemian nobles who were the originators of the
movement against the house of Habsburg, were rejected
by the council of war; in fact, the deliberations of that
body, which, as Gindely says had been summoned at a
moment when the possibility of its proving useful had already
almost ceased, led to hardly any practical result.

It is, however, probable that it was on the suggestion
of the council of war that the king at last decided to
leave Prague (September 28) and to join his army. The
fact that his cousin, Maximilian of Bavaria, himself led the
Catholic forces rendered the king's presence with his troops
even more necessary than it would otherwise have been.
Before the king had joined his army, the enemy had
already achieved important successes. Duke Maximilian
and Bouquoi had taken the towns of Vodnan, Prachatic,
and Pisek by storm. Instead of marching directly on
Prague, they then led their forces in the direction of
Pilsen, the most important town of Western Bohemia,
which was now held by a strong force under Mansfeld.

^ This circumstance, very exceptional in the case of a German prince
of that period, is noted in the Metnoires sur la vie et la mart de la
Princes se Loyse Juliatte Electrice. A Leyden, 1644.

An Historical Sketch 271

On first joining his army, Frederick, perhaps in con-
sequence of his ignorance of military matters, seems to
have taken a not unfavourable view of the situation. In
a letter to Doge Priuli, he informed him that he hoped
soon to expel and totally defeat the invading arniy.^
Events unfortunately were not in accordance with the
king's previsions. When the enemy's troops approached
Plzen, an emissary sent by Mansfeld appeared and de-
manded an armistice. Mansfeld had long been at discord
with the other Bohemian generals, and his troops, who
had received no pay for a year, were mutinous. It is,
however, probable that a promise of a large sum of money
was made to Mansfeld, and that this was the principal
cause of this act of treachery, which destroyed the last
hopes of the Bohemians. The army of the king had in
the meantime arrived at Rokycan, near Plzen, and a
joint attack on the Imperial forces would not have been
without some chance of success. Treachery was indeed
prevalent in the Bohemian camp, as Frederick particularly
noticed in a letter to Queen Elizabeth written about this
time.2 The army at Plzen now no longer menacing their
flanks, it was natural that Bouquoi and the Duke of
Bavaria — or rather Tilly, to whom he delegated the actual
management of the campaign — should have decided to
march on Prague. In their opinion, which the events
justified, the surrender of the capital would end the Pro-
testant movement in Bohemia as well as in the other lands
of the Bohemian crown. Well informed as they were con-
cerning all that occurred in the Bohemian camp, they

1 '* Nos potenli Dei brachio confisi et nequidquam copiam exercitus
hostilis metuentes in persona coptis npstris militaribus adesse voluimus
hostem subinde insequentes ut si qua praeliandi occasio (quam praeter-
labi et neglegi serio cavebimus) offeratur, caput capiti objiciamus et
Deo conatibus nostris propitio finibus regni nostri arcere et peritus
fundere valeamus " (Letter dated, "In Castris ad Lnarz," October 7,
1620, in the State Archives at Venice).

^ " Depuis nous avons ete avertis que le Due de Baviere et le Comte
do Bouquoi ont ete en bataille toute la nuit pour nous attendre ; de la
on peut juger qu nous n'avons faute de traitres." This letter, dated
" Rochesance (Rokycan) Le 12/22 Octobre 1620," is printed in Sir
George Bromley's Royal Letters ; a book quaintly described by Carlyle
as "one of the most curious books on the Thirty Years' War, 'edited'
with a composed stupidity and cheerful infinitude of ignorance which
still farther distinguishes it." The book is, however, not without value
for students of Bohemian history.

272 Bohemia

probably knew that the king's arrival had in no way im-
proved the situation, and that the dissensions among the
generals, and the turbulence of the soldiers, were on
the increase. A gain of time was, therefore — in view of
the increasing demoralization of the Bohemian forces — an
advantage for the Imperialists, and they decided against
marching on Prague by the direct road which led through
Rokycan, round which town Frederick's army was en-
camped. The Catholic army therefore advanced from
Plzen to Kralovic, as if intending to attack Northern
Bohemia. After it had arrived there it suddenly turned
eastward, in the direction towards Prague. Anhalt, who
in view of the notorious incapacity of the king had assumed
the command of the Bohemian army, was not deceived by
the feint of his adversary. His army marched on Prague
by the direct road, and arrived at Rakonic shortly before
the Imperialist forces. The mediasval fortifications of that
town still afforded some defence against such artillery as
was then in use. Numerous skirmishes took place during
the days in which the two armies confronted each other
near Rakonic. The demoralization of the Bohemian army
daily became more apparent, and we are told^ that in
one of the skirmishes near Rakonic two hundred and fifty
Bohemian horsemen fled at the approach of eighteen
Bavarians. Frederick also gave himself up to complete
despondency, and hastily sent a messenger to Prague,
requesting Queen Elizabeth to leave Bohemia immediately.
This plan was frustrated, not only by the opposition of the
Bohemian nobles, but also by the courageous attitude of
the queen. She treated Frederick's suggestion with undis-
guised contempt; and, indeed, during the short period of
their reign showed a firmness and courage in which her
husband was lamentably deficient. Though the Bohemians
were unable to oppose their enemies in the open field, the
strong natural position of Rakonic and its fortifications
rendered it difficult for the Catholic forces to dislodge
Anhalt, at least without great loss of life. They therefore
— on the advice of Tilly — decided again to outflank the
Bohemians and to march straight on Prague. Anhalt,
however, soon discovered that the camp of the Catholics
had been evacuated. He therefore also hurried to Prague
on parallel roads, fearing that the enemy might arrive
* Gindely, Geschichie des Dreissigjdhrigen Krieges.

An Historical Sketch 273

there before him. Near Unhost, two (German) miles from
Prague, the armies were close to each other, but Anhalt
avoided a battle in what appeared to him an unfavourable
position. He hurried on to Prague, and reached the out-
skirts of the capital on the evening of November 7. The
Bohemian forces occupied a strong and judiciously chosen
position on the "White Mountain " (Bila Hora), a few miles
outside the walls of Prague. King Frederick immediately
left his army and retired to the royal castle on the Hradcin,
still bent on urging Queen Elizabeth to fly; he perhaps
also wished to avoid the responsibility of commanding an
army over which he no longer had any authority. Early on
the following morning — November 8 — the Catholic forces
arrived before Prague, the Bavarians and other troops of
the " Liga " forming the vanguard. Tilly and the Duke
of Bavaria, contrary to the opinion of Bouquoi, decided
on an immediate attack. The great demoralization in the
Bohemian army, which was well known to the enemies,
together with the fact that — following the example of their
king — many Bohemian officers had left their soldiers and
retired to Prague, rendered an immediate assault advisable ;
particularly as the Imperialists wished to finish the campaign
before the winter. These motives, more probably than the
eloquence of a Dominican friar, to which the decision was
afterwards attributed, induced the Catholics immediately to
begin their attack.

The numerical forces of the contending armies were
nearly equal. The troops of the Catholic "Liga" num-
bered about 12,000, the Imperialists about 15,000 men.
The forces of Anhalt — including 8000 Hungarian horsemen
sent by Bethlen, and the levies of the Protestant nobles of
Austria — also amounted to about 27,000 men. Nearly
equal in numbers, the armies were very unequal as regards
their fighting capacity. The Catholic troops, well fed and
regularly paid, were thoroughly prepared and eager for
battle ; while the numerous monks, especially the Jesuits,
whom the Duke of Bavaria had brought with him, inflamed
the soldiers to fight bravely against the heretics. The
Bohemian troops, on the other hand, who since the beginning
of the war had been irregularly paid, and who had suffered
great privations, were on the verge of mutiny. The generals
to the last continued quarrelling among themselves, while
the now notorious incapacity of the king, and his openly

274 Bohemia

displayed despondency, contributed to render the result of
the battle certain.

It was on Sunday (November 8) that was fought the
battle which terminated the existence of Bohemia as an
independent state. Even before the Romanist council of
war had decided to attack the Bohemian army immediately,
a small Bavarian force — not yet supported by the mass of
the allied army — attacked the right flank of the Bohemian
position. Count Slik, who commanded some of the
Moravian troops, hastily sought Christian of Anhalt, begging
his permission to attack the Bavarians on their march. It
was a weighty and fateful moment in the history of the
Bohemian people.^ Anhalt at first favoured the proposal,
but on the advice of Hohenlohe — one of Frederick's
German generals — finally refused his consent. The whole
mass of the Catholics had meanwhile united, and advanced
along the whole line, Tilly soon succeeding in driving back
the enemies on the right flank of the Bohemian army. The
Imperial cavalry attacked Count Thurn's regiment on the
extreme left of the Bohemian position. The attack of
the Imperialists was bravely repulsed by the Bohemian
troops, and the cavalry of the younger Prince of Anhalt ^
made a successful attack on the Imperialist infantry, of
which two regiments were put to flight. The situation for
a moment became so serious that Bouquoi, who had been
w^ounded in one of the skirmishes before Rakonic, and was
hardly able to sit his horse, rode to the front to encourage
his soldiers ; but the news of the complete success obtained
by Tilly and the troops of the " Liga " over the right wing
of the Bohemian army soon re-established the confidence of
the Imperialists. The Hungarian horsemen on their first
onslaught defeated the cavalry of Maximilian, but were soon
beaten back by his infantry. Considering the battle as
already lost, they fled in great confusion in the direction of
the river Vltava, which they attempted to cross by a ford
just above Prague — near the present suburb of Smichov,
where more than a thousand of them were drowned. The
combined forces of the Romanists soon stormed the small
redoubts, which Anhalt had hastily erected in the night
preceding the battle, and the whole Bohemian army, seized
by a wild panic, fled in disorder in the direction of the gates

^ Dr. Kreb's Du Schlacht am weissen Berge.
2 Son of Christian of Anhalt.

An Historical Sketch 275

of Prague. There were a few exceptions to the well-nigh
general cowardice. A small body of Moravian troops,
headed by Count Henry Slik and the younger Count
Thurn, retired in the direction of the park known as the
" hvezda " (star) where they continued their defence till
almost all had been killed.^ The soldiers of the Palatinate,
who formed Frederick's body-guard, died almost to a man
in defence of the cause of their unworthy sovereign.- These
isolated instances of bravery were, of course, unavailing to
avert the general disaster, and a battle of a few hours
decided the fate of Bohemia.^

King Frederick, as already mentioned, had proceeded to
the town of Prague as soon as the Bohemian troops arrived
at the White Mountain. Weston and Conway, the English
ambassadors sent by King James, had arrived at Prague,
and the king wished to entertain them at a banquet. It
was at this banquet, an eye-witness ^ tells us, that the king
received the news that his troops were engaged in battle.
He mounted his horse and rode to the neighbouring
Strakov gate. By the time he arrived there the Bohe-
mian army was in full flight, and the king, seeing that
everything was lost, hastily returned to the palace on the
Hradcin, from where, accompanied by the queen and the
court officials, he crossed the Vltava, and retired to the

^ Of this isolated and little known heroic defence Dr. Krebs writes
eloquently : " The south-eastern wall of the Star park thus became
the grave of Bohemian independence. Every Bohemian who passes by
this spot should remember : it is sacred ground on which you tread."

2 " Die Leibguardi des Churpfaltzgrafen zu Ross und zu Fuss welche
blaue Rustung gefuhret seien bis aulY wenige neben ihrem Rittmeister
von Wallesheim geblieben" (NicoJaus Bellus, Osterreichischer Lorber-
kraniz. Frankfurt, 1625). Bellus differs from most contemporary
writers by saying that the battle lasted during the whole day. "Das
TrefFen hat von morgen biss Abends umb 5 Uhrn gewehrt."

^ It is almost impossible that the battle should have lasted one hour
only, as has been often stated. The belief in an almost instantaneous
victory may have originated from the circumstance that the Catholics
attributed their victory to the intervention of the Virgin Mary.

^ " Castra Bohemica hostem tentare rumor ad Fredericum Regem
defertur, interrupto, convivio, equum conscendit propere castra periculo
agitata visurus, aderat globus eqnstris quingentorum capitum ; ei-ara et
ego in isto comitatu, turbati convivii auctor. Ad portam Strahovensem
accedente Rege clausa ista erat, circumspicit infelicem exercitus sui
fugam, vidit repentes ad sublime valli Duces, ipsorum equos cum mille
aliis per aperta cursitantes, spectaculum sane deplorandum. Clamore
mulierum horrendo Rex perterritus arcem repetabat " (Habernfeld).

276 Bohemia

" old town " on the right bank of the river. A large part
of the soldiery also hastily sought refuge on the right bank
of the Vltava, while many more dispersed in various direc-
tions. On the same evening Frederick assembled his
principal councillors and generals, to deliberate what steps
to take. The king himself was strongly in favour of com-
pletely abandoning a cause he believed hopeless, and had
but one wish — to leave Bohemia instantly. He displayed,
however, a certain amount of courage, probably through
the influence of the queen, and attempted to dissemble his
opinion. Tschernembl spoke strongly in favour of further
resistance. Pie suggested holding the town at least for a
few days, collecting the scattered troops, and then making
an orderly retreat. It was left to Tschernembl, a foreigner
and a German, to remind the Bohemians of the glorious
victory which their ancestors had achieved on Zizka's Hill,
close to the spot where the deHberation took place. The
younger Count Thurn, who alone of the Bohemian officers
had fought not ingloriously during the battle, spoke in the
same sense as Tschernembl. Christian of Anhalt, the
originator of the intrigues and negotiations which had
raised Frederick to his precarious throne, now spoke in
favour of immediate flight ; he had been in constant con-
flict with the Bohemian generals, and wished to leave the
country as soon as possible. The principal argument of
Anhalt was that the mutinous condition of the troops
rendered it impossible to induce them to face the enemy
again. He even suggested the possibility of their entering
into independent negotiations with the Catholic leaders.
Anhalt's former antagonist. Count Thurn, to whose influ-
ence the Defenestration and the beginning of the war
were due, now also lost all courage, and spoke in favour of
evacuating Bohemia. This was the king's opinion also, but
he still attempted to postpone his decision. He therefore
requested the English envoys, Conway and Weston, to
enter into negotiations with the Duke of Bavaria and
Bouquoi. The ministers undertook this mission, and sent
a message to the Bavarian camp requesting an interview
with Maximilian. This message remained unanswered, as
did also a second one, which they forwarded on the follow-
ing morning. It was well known to the Catholic princes
that King James had no sympathy with the enterprise of
his son-in-law, or indeed with the Protestant cause, and at

An Historical Sketch 277

no period,^ perhaps, was the prestige of English diplomacy
so low. As no answer was received, it was decided at nine
in the morning (November 9) that the queen should leave
immediately with her youngest child. The king still pre-
tended to have the intention of remaining in the town.
The queen's travelling-carriage was prepared : " the reso-
luteness he had hitherto displayed now forsook the king ;
when Elizabeth, carrying her son, entered the carriage, it
became impossible to hold him back. He mounted his
horse, and gave the signal for a general flight."

Though Mansfeld shortly afterwards again attempted to
oppose the Imperialists, and some slight resistance was still
offered by Moravia and Silesia, the battle of the Bila Hora
was shortly followed by the complete submission of all the
lands of the Bohemian crown.

What were the reasons which caused the Bohemian nation,
that had two centuries before, proved itself victorious under
even more difficult circumstances, to succumb almost with-
out a struggle? There is no doubt that the universal
adoption of serfdom in Bohemia had entirely changed the
character of the population. In the Hussite struggle large
armies of peasants had freely and enthusiastically defended
their country, and the democratic instinct, innate in the
Slav race, had had full play. The Bohemian war of 1618
to 1620 was on both sides waged by mercenaries, and the
better paid and better fed soldiers of Tilly and Bouquoi
easily prevailed over the troops of Frederick, who were
almost always on the verge of mutiny. The national
enthusiasm which had animated the Bohemians on previous
occasions was also naturally absent in this, the last of their
wars. The German prince, whom their nobles had elected
as king, ignorant as he was even of the language of the land,
could not inspire them with the confidence which — in spite
of temporary differences — they felt for men such as Zizka
and Prokop, born Bohemians, thoroughly in touch with the
national feeling. The miserable irresolution and weakness,
not to call it cowardice, displayed by the German prince,
who had undertaken to govern a headstrong people, ill
disposed to all foreign, and especially to German, rule, made
his position even more hopeless. The religious enthusiasm
on which Budova, Ruppa, and other more far-seeing leaders
probably reckoned as a substitute for the necessarily absent
racial one, was always found wanting. In Bohemia, as in

278

Bohemia

Germany, Protestantism was divided between the Calvinist
and the Lutheran creed, and the strongest animosity then
existed between the adherents of the two beliefs.^

The Calvinistic doctrine, then prevalent in the Palatinate,
and which Frederick and his councillors would undoubtedly,
had fate favoured them, have established in Bohemia, was
distasteful to many of the Bohemian Protestants ; they had,
indeed, long diverged from the old utraquist Church, founded
on the Compacts, but they had retained much of the ritual
and discipline of the Church of Rome. The religious party
most in harmony with the doctrine of the divines of the
Palatinate was the " Unity " of the Bohemian Brethren ; of
these, however, many entertained scruples as to the right of
resistance to temporal authority under any circumstances
whatever. It has already been noted that Zerotin, the
leader of the " Unity " in Moravia, who also exercised great
influence over the Brethren in Bohemia, totally refused to
join the movement against the house of Habsburg. It
remains to allude to the hopeless situation of Bohemia in
its relations to foreign countries. A country such as
Bohemia, neither very large nor very rich, was at best unable
to resist the entire power of that absolutist alliance between
Spain, Austria and Rome which Fra Paoli Sarpi termed the
diacatholicon.

There is no doubt that immediately after the battle of the
^Vhite Mountain the councillors of Ferdinand decided to
change entirely the ancient free constitution of Bohemia,
though, as will be noted in the next chapter, circumstances
did not permit of these changes being carried out immedi-
ately in their entirety.

Before the great changes in the political and religious
condition of Bohemia were carried out, Ferdinand's govern-
ment considered it advisable that the public punishment of

^ In a letter addressed to Count Slik, one of the Bohemian leaders —
dated Dresden, August 23, 1619 — Hoe, court chaplain to the Elector
of Saxony, writes: "Your Lordship is known to the whole Christian
world for your zeal against the injurious, blasphemous, and damnable
Calvinistic creed. I beg your Lordship, 'per amorem Dei et per
vulnera Christi,' to retain these views, and to prove it, so that posterity
may for ever have cause to praise your zeal. Your Lordship has not
been able to endure the papal yoke ; verily that of the Calvinist is as
intolerable and indeed more so" (Letter printed in the pamphlet entitled :
Wohlmeinende Missiv von Herr7i D. Hoe, Oberhofprediger, 16 19). It
may be added that Dr. Hoe did not deny the authenticity of this letter,
though he blamed Count Slik for publishing it.

An Historical Sketch 279

the leaders of the late revolution should take place. Early
in the year 162 1 the principal Bohemian nobles who had
not fled from the country, and other leaders were arrested.
On June 21 Budova, Count Cernin, Count Slik, Harrant
Lord of Polzic, the celebrated Doctor Jessenius, who had
negotiated with Gabriel Bethlen on behalf of the Bohemian
Government, and others — twenty-seven in all — were executed
in the market-place of Prague. They all met their fate with
great fortitude.^ On many others imprisonment and other
lesser punishments were inflicted. "These melancholy
executions mark the end of the old and independent
development of Bohemia. Members of the most prominent
families of the Bohemian nobility, eminent citizens and
learned men, in fact all the representatives of the culture of
the land, ended here, and with them their cause. The
destiny of the country was henceforth in the hands of
foreigners, who had neither comprehension nor sympathy
with its former institutions." ^

CHAPTER VIII

THE KINGS OF THE HOUSE OF HABSBURG FROM THE BATTLE
OF THE WHITE MOUNTAIN TO THE PRESENT DAY (162O-
I910).

It is certain that the fact that all resistance to the Im-
perialists ceased in the Bohemian lands very shortly after

1 " When one of these holy men and martyrs for God was called out
(from prison for execution) then to our great astonishment a leave-taking
took place in a pleasant manner which rejoiced our hearts, just as if they
were preparing to go to a banquet or some pastime. ' Now, my dear
friends, may our Lord God bless and guard you ; may He grant you
the consolation of the Holy Ghost, patience and courage so that you may
be able now also to prove in the moment of your death, that you have
heartily and bravely defended the honour of God. I go before you
that I may first see the glory of Eternal God, the glory of our beloved
Redeemer: but I await you directly after me; already in this hour
earthiy grief vanishes and a new heart-felt and eternal gladness begins.'
The other prisoners who remained behind answered, ' May our Lord
God bless you on your way, for the sake of the guiltless death of Jesus
Christ ; may He send His holy angels to meet your soul. You go before
us to the glory of Heaven. We also will follow you, and we are certain
because of Him in whom we have believed, Jesus Christ, that we shall
to-day all meet there again, and that with our beloved Redeemer, the
angels, and the chosen of God we shall rejoice for ever ' " {Skdla zc
Zhore, vol. v. p. iio-iii).

2 Gindely, Geschichte des Dreissigjdhrigen Krieges,

28o Bohemia

the battle of the Bila Hora is to a great extent due to the
incapacity and cowardice of King Frederick. The negotia-
tions into which the Imperial generals had — as mentioned
in the last chapter — entered with Mansfeld soon failed after
the battle of the White Mountain, as the victors were no
longer prepared to pay the price he demanded for his
treachery. Mansfeld, who «till held the important town of
Plzen, therefore determined to return to the allegiance of
King Frederick, and renewed hostiHties against the Im-
perialists in Bohemia. The campaign was, however, of
short duration. Frederick, always an unwilling soldier,
refused to join his forces in Bohemia, though he forwarded
a large sum of money to Mansfeld. The latter proceeded on
a short visit to Heilbronn, where he helped to obtain aid
from the German Protestants who were then assembled there.
During his absence from Bohemia a mutiny broke out
among his troops. On the condition of receiving a large
sum of money, and being allowed freely to leave Bohemia,
they surrendered the city of Plzen to the Imperialists. In
November 162 1 Tabor, and in March 1622 Tfebofi,^ the
last towns still held for King Frederick, also capitulated to
the Austrians.

As already mentioned, the other lands of the Bohemian
crown also offered but slight resistance to the Imperialists.
Lusatia had even before the battle of the White Mountain
been subdued by the Elector of Saxony. The Lutheran
Elector immediately guaranteed to his co-religionists the
free exercise of their religion. In the course of the Thirty
Years' War Lusatia was ceded to Saxony, and its connection
with Bohemia, always a slight one, henceforth ceases
entirely. Moravia for a moment appeared inclined to offer
some resistance to the Austrians. Count Thurn, after the
departure of King Frederick from Bohemia, proceeded to
Moravia and endeavoured to induce the Estates to continue
their resistance. He met with no success. Charles of
Zerotin,^ the most eminent statesman of Moravia, had
remained faithful to the house of Habsburg, even at a moment
when the national cause appeared successful. He had done

^ In German, Wittingau.

2 For a sketch of the interesting career of Charles of Zerotin see my
History of Bohemian Literature (2d ed. pp. 321-325), and particularly
my intvcduction to my translation of Conienius's Labyi'inth of the
World.

An Historical Sketch 281

so not without personal risk, as he had at the meeting of the
Estates at Brno, which decided to join the Bohemians, been
threatened by nationahsts with the "fate of Martinic and
Slavata." Zerotin now advised unconditional surrender, and
hoped that some gratitude would be shown to those Protes-
tants who had risked their lives and estates for the House of
Habsburg. The Estates decided to send a deputation to
implore the Emperor's mercy. The deputies were indeed
received by Ferdinand, but he did not deign to answer their
address. The Moravians some days later received a letter
from the Imperial chancellory stating that it was only the
inexhaustible graciousness of the Emperor which had induced
him to condescend to receive the envoys. They were also
told that the Emperor had appointed Cardinal Dietrichstein
governorof Mora via, and that he had been instructed to punish '"
mercilessly all enemies of Rome and of the house of Habs-
burg. In Silesia, also, the re-establishment of Austrian rule
was carried out almost without bloodshed. The Emperor's
ally, John George, Elector of Saxony, entered the country
from Lusatia, and in consequence of his conciliatory attitude,
occupied it almost without resistance. He promised a full
amnesty to all concerned in the recent disturbances, and
guaranteed to the Protestants freedom of religious worship.
The Elector thus incurred the grave displeasure of Ferdinand,
for it had already been decided in the Imperial councils that
in future no heretic should be allowed to dwell in the Habs-
burg dominions. The Emperor also strongly disapproved
of the granting of a general amnesty, and he by a special
decree excluded from it the Margrave of Jagerndorf. The
lands of the margrave, a prince of the House of HohenzoUern,
who had been the leader of the Protestants of Lusatia and
Silesia, were confiscated and given to one of the Emperor's
courtiers. This fact is not without importance, as the
wrongs inflicted on his ancestor were one of the reasons —
or, as some have called them, pretexts — alleged by Frederick
the Great, when he invaded Silesia.

The complete reorganization of Bohemia in accordance
lo the views of Ferdinand and of the Church of Rome
involved so many new laws and enactments, referring to
almost all matters connected with the country, that it is not
easy to give a brief outline of the " Catholic Reformation,"
— to use the official designation. The re-establishment of
the Roman Church was the matter that Ferdinand had
K 2

282 Bohemia

most at heart, and it deserves to be noticed first because,
of all the changes introduced after the battle of the White
Mountain, it has proved the most permanent. Bohemia
presents the nearly unique case of a country which formerly
almost entirely Protestant, has now become almost entirely
Catholic. The popular optimistic fallacy which maintains
that in no country has the religious belief of a country been
entirely suppressed by persecution and brute force is
disproved by the fate of Bohemia.

It is a proof of the thorough knowledge of the mind of
his master which the victorious Bouquoi possessed that he,
but a few days after the battle of the White Mountain,
forwarded to Vienna a large case containing all the parch-
ments which recorded the ancient rights and privileges of
Bohemia. Among them was of course the famed " Letter of
Majesty," the object of Ferdinand's particular hatred. The
Emperor greatly rejoiced, and with his scissors cut through
the abhorred document, thus indicating that it had become
invalid.^ Ferdinand had in early life vowed to the Madonna
of Loretto that he would exterminate all heresies in the
lands which he was destined to rule. It must be admitted
that he never swerved from the task which he had under-
taken. As soon as the messengers of victory arrived, he
determined to undertake a pilgrimage to Mariazell. The
first celebrations however took place in Vienna itself. The
Emperor and the whole court proceeded to the cathedral of
St. Stephen, where a Te Deum was sung, and Cardinal
Dietrichstein, in an eloquent sermon, celebrated the
triumph of the Habsburg arms. Yet more impressive was
a sermon preached on the following day by a Capuchin
friar, Brother Sabinus, who was a great favourite of the
Imperial court. The Emperor was present at this sermon
also. Friar Sabinus reminded Ferdinand of all the insults
he had endured from the Bohemians, and insisted on his
duty now to act mercilessly ; he should conform to the
words of the Psalmist : " Thou shalt break them with a rod
of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's
vessel." 2 The Emperor — Friar Sabinus continued — must
exterminate the nobility of Bohemia, and he must deprive

^ In his recent interesting study on the ' ' Letter of Majesty " Dr. Krofta
has pubhshed a facsimile of the famed document. The traces of
Ferdinand's scissors are clearly noticeable.

* Psalm ii. 9.

An Historical Sketch 283

the people of all their liberties, and particularly of the
" Letter of Majesty " ; then would they become faithful and
submissive subjects. Should the Emperor show any mercy,
greater evils would b'efall him than those which he had
recently undergone. "This moment," the friar continued,
" is a decisive one. If the Emperor does not now act with
energy the words of the prophet will be applied to him, who
said : ' Because thou hast let go out of thy hand a man
whom I appointed to utter destruction, therefore thy life
shall go for his life, and thy people for his people.' " ^ These
words greatly impressed the Emperor. As Gindely has well
said, the friar here expounded unconsciously the system
according to which Ferdinand henceforth ruled Bohemia.
The expulsion from Bohemia of all who did not entirely
conform to the Church of Rome was decided as soon as the
news of the victory of the White Mountain reached Vienna.
Circumstances, however, rendered it necessary that the
measures to this purpose should be carried out gradually
and consecutively. The members of the Lutheran Church
were under the immediate protection of the Lutheran
Elector of Saxony, who had been a faithful ally of Ferdi-
nand during the recent campaign. PoUtical reasons
rendered an immediate expulsion- of the Bohemian
Lutherans very difficult, and some of Ferdinand's council-
lors who became known as the "Politicians" strongly
advised moderation. Their influence, however, only oc-
casionally succeeded in persuading the Emperor to delay
some of his extreme measures. The principal agents
employed by the Emperor to carry out the " Catholic
Reformation " were John Lobelius, Archbishop of Prague,
and Caspar Questenberg, Abbot of the Strahov Monastery.
They were both Germans, and were inspired by a hatred of
the Bohemian nation that was founded on racial as well as
on religious motives. The first measure suggested by these
men was the expulsion from Bohemia of all preachers who
professed the Calvinist doctrine or belonged to the com-
munity of the Bohemian Brethren. This measure was
immediately carried out, and in May 1621, 200 preachers
had already been expelled from Bohemia. It would lead
too far to enumerate all the consecutive steps of this
relentless persecution, by means of which the complete
extirpation of all creeds differing from the Church of Rome
^ I Kings XX. 42.

284 Bohemia

was finally obtained. It can be stated generally that the
policy of Vienna varied in accordance with the fluctuations
of the Thirty Years' War. When the Imperial arms were
successful, new rigorous measures were introduced in
Bohemia. When the Protestant armies were victorious,
the " Politicians " persuaded the Emperor to act with
more moderation, and not to increase the number of his
enemies.

Shortly after the first expulsions of Protestants from
Bohemia, the extreme Romanists obtained a very zealous
and powerful ally in the person of Carlo Caraffa, the new
papal nuncio at Vienna. It is only of late years that the
publication of his despatches, preserved in the archives of
the Vatican, has proved how great a part Caraffa played in
the Catholic Reformation of Bohemia. He visited Prague
before proceeding to Vienna, and expressed strong dis-
pleasure at the tardiness with which, according to his
opinion, the suppression of utraquism was being carried
out. He was also very indignant when informed that in
many churches of Prague communion was still administered
in the two kinds. On the submission of the old-utraquist
consistory^ in 1587 and 1593, when it renounced all Hus's
teaching, and somewhat later formally acknowledged the
authority of the Pope, the Roman Church admitted com-
munion in the two kinds in Bohemia, as it has indeed done
in other countries also. Caraffa's demand was not, there-
fore, immediately granted. Through his influence, however,
Prince Liechtenstein, the Austrian Governor of Bohemia,
ceded to the Romanist priesthood numerous churches in
Prague — besides those of which they had taken possession
immediately after the battle of the White Mountain.

In the summer of the year 1621, Mansfeld's troops — as
already mentioned — evacuated Bohemia, and the Austrian
arms were at that time also successful in Germany. The
result was a new decree — dated December 13, 162 1 —
which expelled from Bohemia all priests and clergymen who
did not conform to the Church of Rome. To avoid the
displeasure of the Elector of Saxony, the Austrian govern-
ment informed him that these priests were expelled not
because they were opposed to the doctrine of Rome, but
because they had tal<en part in the recent rebellion against
the house of Habsburg. At the meeting of the Imperial Diet
1 See Chapter VII.

An Historical Sketch 285

at Regensburg in 1623, the envoys of the Elector of Saxony
and even those of some of the Romanist princes remonstrated
against the Imperial decree, which was indeed a direct vio-
lation of promises made by the Emperor to the Elector of
Saxony. In consequence of the influence of CarafTa these
remonstrances had no result.

In Bohemia the policy of Caraffa proved more and more
successful. Communion in the two kinds was entirely sup-
pressed. As the devotion of the people to the chalice was
still very great, this led to considerable disturbances, particu-
larly at Prague. When by order of the archbishop a
Romanist priest accompanied by a large number of soldiers
appeared in the Tyn church while Locika, the parish priest,
was celebrating Mass according to the utraquist rites, Locika
refused to interrupt his service, and the people attempted to
defend their revered priest. These expressions of the popular
feeling were suppressed with extreme severity. Locika
himself w^as arrested and conveyed to the castle of Krivo-
klat, " where it was said that he was decapitated so that he
should in future cause no disturbances amongst the people." ^
The Roman ritual was now re-established in all the churches
of Prague. This w^as done with particular solemnity in the
church of St. Martin, where Jacobellus had in 1414 first
dispensed the sacrament in the two kinds. At this time
also the statue of King George of Podebrad, which repre-
sented him pointing with his sword to the chalice of which
he had been so valiant a defender, was removed from the
facade of the Tyn church as being^ an " utraquist emblem."
The indignation of the citizens, most of whom were still
attached to their ancient faith, was naturally very great.

In consequence of the incessant expulsions of the clergy,
very few priests for a time remained in Bohemia. In many
villages and even small towns the religious services had
entirely ceased. Though the Jesuits flocked to Bohemia in
great numbers immediately after the defeat of the national
cause, they were not able to occupy all the vacant parson-
ages and curateships. The Archbishop of Prague therefore
declared that all utraquist priests could retain their livings,
if they consented to administer the sacrament in one kind
only, and to conform to the celibacy of the clergy,
as established by the Roman Church. As most of
the utraquist priests were married men, the archbishop
^ SkaJa ze Zhore Historic Ceskd, v. 213.

286 Bohemia

declared that their wives would be allowed to continue to
live with them, if they agreed to accept the name of cooks,
a word that under the circumstances of course veiled an
opprobrious designation. Most of the priests indignantly
rejected this insulting suggestion, but, forced by extreme
poverty, some were obliged to agree to it. This measure
which forced honest women, who had been married
according to the rights of their Church, to choose between
starvation and disgrace is one of the darkest pages of the
very black records of the Bohemian Catholic Reformation.

Though from the moment that the battle of the White
Mountain had been fought, many Bohemian nobles and
citizens had been driven into exile, priests only had in the
first years after the battle been expelled from Bohemia
solely because they did not conform to the Church of Rome.
In 1623, Bethlen Gabor, prince of Transylvania, again rose
in arms against the house of Habsburg, and after defeating
the Austrian troops, invaded Moravia. Moderation there-
fore for a time became necessary. In 1624, however, a
treaty of peace was concluded with the Prince of Tran-
sylvania, and the Vienna official now considered the moment
opportune to continue the persecutions in Bohemia. The
nuncio, Caraffa, about this time obtained a powerful
ally in the Jesuit father, Lamormain, who had just be-
come the Emperor's confessor. Caraffa and Lamormain
declared it to be an absolute necessity that all lyho did not
conform to the Roman Church should be expelled from
Bohemia. An exception was to be made only in favour of
the Bohemian peasants whom serfdom attached to the soil,
to the cultivation of which they were necessary. It was
stated that by means of imprisonment and corporal punish-
ment they could be forced to become at least nominal
Romanists, and that in the course of time they, or at least
their children, would become true members of the Roman
Church. These suggestions appeared extreme even to such
a religious enthusiast as the Emperor Ferdinand was. La-
mormain advised him to meditate deeply on this weighty
matter, and to prepare for this meditation by receiving
communion. Lamormain then, leaving the court for a few
days, retired to the Jesuit monastery in Vienna to offer
up incessant prayers that his counsels might be favour-/
ably received. When he returned to court the Emperoij
declared to him that after receiving communion the Holy*

An Historical Sketch 287

Ghost had enlightened him and ordered him to accept with-
out hesitation all advice that his confessor might give him.^ '
By order of the Emperor two new decrees referring to the
protestants of Bohemia were then published (May 1624).
The first ordered the Imperial officials to pursue with greater
energy all preachers whose teaching was not in accordance
with that of the Church of Rome. The second practically,
though not yet formally, excluded all Protestants from Bohe-
mia. No Protestant was in future to enjoy the rights of citizen-
ship, to own or to inherit land in Bohemia. No marriage
which was not celebrated in accordance to the Roman rites,
and no marriage of a Protestant was henceforth to be valid.
Baptisms and burials without the assistance of a Roman
priest were prohibited. These decrees caused great rejoic-
ing in Rome. The nuncio was instructed to express the
Pope's special gratitude, and the College of the Propaganda
celebrated Ferdinand as a " second Constantine and Theo-
dosius." 2

It appears that these draconic regulations were not
immediately carried out in their whole extent in Bohemia.
Warfare with alternating results continued in Germany, and
the " Politicians " at the coui't of Ferdinand may still have
thought it advisable not to exasperate too much a once
formidable nation. In 1625 the Elector of Bavaria warned
Ferdinand that a new confederacy against the House of
Habsburg appeared probable. Not entirely to alienate the
sympathies of the Germans, Ferdinand decreed that non-
Catholics should in the German districts of Bohemia be
allowed to hold baptismal, marriage and burial services
according to their " heretical " rites, with the tacit connivance
of the authorities. To the Slavic majority of the population
no such a favour was to be granted, " as it was not likely
that their complaints would reach Germany."

On August 27, 1626, Tilly decisively defeated, at Lutter,
near Wolfenbiittel, the army of King Christian of Denmark,
who had come to the aid of the German Protestants, and
about the same time Ferdinand's general Waldstein^ de-
feated the forces of Bethlen Gabor. These victories, as usual,

^ Despatch of Carafifa in the Vatican archives, quoted by Gindely.

2 Quoted by Gindely from the acts of the propaganda.

2 Even the example of Schiller is not a sufficient authority for calling
the great general ' ' Wallenstein. " I use the form of the name which is
accepted by the family and generally used in Bohemia.

288 Bohemia

caused the Catholic reformation to be carried out with
greater energy. The Bohemians long opposed a tacit
resistance to the efforts of the Romanist priests who strove
to win them over to their creed. The Romanist services
were held in the presence of only a few people, who were
by force driven into the churches. Some of the preachers
of the community of the Bohemian Brethren still secretly
remained in their country and held secret services in the
vast forests of Bohemia. Even many professed Romanists
attended these services. Ferdinand was very indignant
at this, and by his order a Government official informed the
citizens of Kutna Hora, who appear to have been strong
opponents of the Catholic reformation — that he considered
" as beasts, not men," ^ those who refused to accept the teach-
ing of the only beatifying Church. The Romanist priests
also, seeing how firmly the Bohemians clung to their ancient
faith, became impatient. Thus the inhabitants of the small
town of Zebrak complained that their parish priest insulted
them, calling them " donkeys, boobies and fools." ^ Cardinal
Harrach, who had succeeded Lobelius as Archbishop of
Prague, declared to the Emperor that half-measures had
proved unsuccessful and that the extirpation of all dissidents
from the Roman faith could restore tranquillity to Bohemia.
The " Politicians " again advised moderation, and the
Emperor, as was his custom, left the final decision to the
Jesuits. The councillors he chose' were his confessor,
Father Lamormain, and Father Philippi, the tutor of his son.
The two Jesuits declared that the suppression of all heresy
was the Emperor's first duty. They advised that members
of their order should visit all parts of Bohemia and preach
the true faith. They were to be accompanied by soldiers,
who were to be quartered on the inhabitants till they
formally made their submission to the Church of Rome.
Should some men subsequently relapse into their former
errors, troops should again be quartered on them, that
vexations might bring them to their right minds, and they,
having thus become wiser, should fulfil their duty.^

^ " Nicht Menschen sondern Vieh" (Gindely, Geschichte der Gegen-
refort/iation in Bdkfnt?i).

- Ibid.

•' The stern ferocity of the Jesuits appears clearly in the Latin
oriiinal of their report. They wrote : " Si . . . multi post acceptam
ins ructionem perseverant in sua pertinacia, illi soli graventur milite et

An Historical Sketch 289

Ferdinand did not hesitate to accept the advice of his
councillors, and he shortly afterwards issued the famed
decree of July 31, 1627. The emperor had himself chosen
this day, as it was the anniversary of the death of St. Ignatius
of Loyola. Its principal and very simple enactment decreed
that no one not belonging to the Church of Rome should
be allowed to live in Bohemia, or even to enter the country.
This decree applied equally to all — nobles, citizens and
peasants, men and women. The nobles were granted a
delay of six months, within which they were to conform to
the Church of Rome. Those who refused to do so were
then granted a further term of six months for the purpose
of selling their estates. No exceptions w^ere made. Even
Charles of Zerotin, a firm adherent of the house of Habs-
burg, who had risked his life for that dynasty, was obliged
to leave Bohemia. Though a few " heretics " still remained
in hiding in Bohemia, the " Catholic Reformation " can after
this decree be considered as having been accomplished.
Bohemia, at least nominally, became an exclusively Romanist
State.

Two measures of minor importance are in close connec-
tion with this great change in the condition of the land.
One is the suppression of the university of Prague, at least
as a free and scientific institution. The university had
strongly favoured the national cause. Several of the most
important meetings of the patriots had been held at the
Carolinum, the principal building belonging to the univer-
sity. The learned physician Jessenius, who had been rector
in the year of the Defenestration, a man of great talent and
eloquence, had been employed by the " Directors " on several
diplomatic missions. He was punished by the Imperialists
with special cruelty. Before he was executed on the fateful
2ist of June his tongue was cut out — as that of Cicero had
once been — and was nailed to the scaffold. Some of the
Spanish generals in the Imperial army, men such as Bal-
thasar Marradas, Martin Huerta, Caretto del Grano,i who
were noted for their excessive cruelty, suggested that in

parcatur conversis ut vexatio det intellectum et tamdiu graventur quoad
escipiscant et officio satisfaciant."

^ The names of these men, on whom vast estates in Bohemia were
bestowed, were long preserved in the memory of the people. Hatred
of the Spaniards long lingered in their minds, and even during the
recent war between Spain and the United States many rejoiced over the
defeats of the Spaniards.

290 Bohemia

consequence of the attitude of the university the Carolinuim
should be demoHshed. The Jesuits, however, opposed this
scheme.

Ferdinand I had in 1556 introduced this Order into
Bohemia, and the college of St. Clement was founded by
it shortly afterwards. Between this new college and the
ancient university of Charles IV, which had adopted the
utraquist and afterwards the Lutheran teaching, a spirit of
rivalry soon sprung up. A struggle between the two learned
institutions began,^ which ended only with the battle of the
Bila Hora. After that victory Ferdinand no doubt imme-
diately decided to suppress the ancient university and to
transfer its funds and privileges to the Jesuit college. In this
case also the great change was only carried out gradually.
At the end of the year 1620 the estates belonging to the
university were confiscated, and German soldiers, who griev-
ously ill-treated the tenantry, were quartered there. The
university vainly endeavoured to avert the blow that threat-
ened it. The prorector Campanus, when Ferdinand arrived
in Prague, addressed the victor in flattering Latin verses
in a somewhat undignified manner.^ Neither these verses
nor the petitions of other members of the university made
any impression on Ferdinand, who had already — on the
advice of Father Lamormain — decided to establish the
Jesuits in the university. Lamormain disapproved of all
delay; he said that the university had for two hundred
years been in the hands of the Hussites ; teachers and
magisters educated there in the atheist doctrine of Hussit-
ism had appeared in all towns and hamlets; many had
married rich widows, and the number of heretics had thus

^ I can only allude briefly here to this interesting struggle. It is
well described in Dr. Winter's Deje vys Kych skol (History of the High
Schools of Prague).

"^ In conformity to their rather mean tendency, the verses of Campanus
are very indifferent. He wrote —

" Par virtute nepos et nomine, Caesar, habenas
Qui nunc imperii temperat aequus, adest
Arma deses rapuit funesta Boemia frustra
Caesaris ad tanti mox ruitura pedes
Victa tamen surges sub tali principe, smges
Patria, parcus erit sanguinis ille tiii.
Tu quoque pone metus, Academi vera secutum,
Assuetumque libris, innocuumque genus
Aurea sub docto sunt principe secula doctis
Talis et ire viri sole cadente, cadit."

An Historical Sketch 291

become greater.^ The Emperor finally decided that in con-
sideration of the memory of King Charles the Carolinum
should not be destroyed but placed at the disposal of the
Jesuits, whose college was to take the place of the old
university. The new foundation was to be called the
*' universitas Carolina Ferdinandea." All the old magisters
and professors were expelled, even Campanus, though he
in the last years of his life professed the Roman creed. By
the end of the year 1622 all the buildings belonging to the
university had been handed over to the Jesuits, and — some-
what later than the teachers — all students who had not
conformed to the teaching of Rome were expelled and
exiled from Bohemia.

Closely connected with the suppression of all teaching
opposed to Rome was the destruction of the ancient
national literature of Bohemia. Almost all literature in
Bohemia subsequent to Hus had been imbued with the
spirit of the great reformer and patriot. All this literature
was therefore doomed to destruction, and the Jesuits were
certainly to a great extent successful. If we except the
classical literatures, there is none to whom belong so many
books the existence of which can be proved with certainty,
yet of which all trace is lost, as to the older literature of
Bohemia. Jesuits accompanied by soldiers — to prevent the
possibility of resistance — were empowered to search for
heretical books in all Bohemian dwellings from the noble-
man's castle to the peasant's hut. The Jesuit Andrew
Konias is particularly mentioned as rivalling the fame of
Omer or Archbishop Theophilus. He is perhaps the
greatest book destroyer known to history, and boasted of
having himself burnt 60,000 Bohemian volumes.

To such enthusiastic Romanists as Ferdinand and his
Jesuit councillors the re-establishment of the Roman Church
in Bohemia and the complete suppression of all so-called
heresies no doubt appeared the principal result of the Bila
Hora. The complete transformation which Bohemia then
underwent included, however, also an entire change in the
constitution and even in the language of the country. In
the years immediately following the great national defeat
Bohemia was under martial law. The German and Spanish
generals and the Austrian governor Charles of Liechtenstein

* Dr. Winter, Deje vys Kych skol (History of the High Schools of
Prague).

292 Bohemia

wielded unrestricted power. In 1627 only Ferdinand pub-
lished a new fundamental law known as the " renewed ordi-
nance of the land." ^ Its principal points may here be briefly
noted.2 It had for centuries been a moot point whether
the Bohemian crown was an elective or an hereditary one.
This point was now settled for ever. The Bohemian crown
was declared to be hereditary in the house of Habsburg,
both in the male and in the female line. Only in the case
of the complete extinction of that dynasty was the right of
electing a sovereign to be reassumed by the Estates. The
ancient ceremony of the " reception " of the new king,
which had continued during the rule of the first Habsburg
princes, and which preserved a semblance of a sanction to
the presence of the new ruler on the part of the Estates, was
abolished. The ceremony of the coronation of the kings
was, however, retained. The representative institutions of
the land were also remodelled. To the three Estates — the
nobles, knights and townsmen — a fourth, the ecclesiastical
one was added, and this one was to take precedence over all
the others. In Moravia the ecclesiastical Estate had already
existed previously. It now obtained there also precedence
over the other Estates. It was further decreed that all
privileges and rights granted to " acatholics " — as all who
did not belong to the Church of Rome now began to be
officially called — were revoked. With the exception of the
Jews, no one not belonging to the Roman Church was
henceforth to reside in Bohemia. A further very important
enactment declared that the sovereign henceforth reserved
to himself the entire legislative power in the Bohemian
lands. Most of the ancient State offices continued to exist,
but the most important of them, that of burgrave of the
Karlstein, was suppressed. A great change took place with
regard to the appointment to the offices of State. The king
had hitherto been obliged to be guided in his choice by the
opinion of the Estates. He now obtained the power of
appointing practically whomever he wished. A further
enactm.ent greatly restricted the powers of the Bohemian
law courts, and reserved to the sovereign the right of

^ In Bohemian '* Obnovene Zrizeni zemoke."

^ For this very short sketch I am largely indebted to the learned
I'rofessor Kalousek. His Ceski Statni Prdvo (in a rongh translation,
*' The Bohemian Constitution") is the standard work on Bohemian
constitutional history.

An Historical Sketch 293

revising and annulling all their decisions. It was further
declared that the right of granting citizenship ^ to foreigners,
which the Estates had formerly possessed, should in future
belong to the king. A last and very important enactment
stated that henceforth the German language should in all
law courts and Government offices be recognized as having
the same value as the national language.

In the preamble to this constitutional enactment Ferdi-
nand declared that he had conquered the Bohemian lands
by the force of the sword and that " the whole kingdom had
rebelled in forma universitatis " — a statement which, accord-
ing to the then generally accepted views, involved the loss of
all the ancient rights and privileges of the nation. In
apparent contradiction to this declaration, the Emperor
nineteen days after the publication of the new ordinance
issued a decree stating that he allowed the Bohemians to
preserve their ancient privileges as far as they had not been
suppressed by the new constitutional enactments. This
contradiction has often been noticed, and the learned
Professor Kalousek — our principal authority on the consti-
tutional history of Bohemia — thinks that Ferdinand's
promise was never a genuine one, and that it was only made
to pacify the Bohemians. This question has of recent
times again been discussed on several occasions — in 1847
when the Bohemian Estates attempted to recover some of
their ancient rights, and in 187 1 when that talented and able
statesman the late Count Hohenwarth made an attempt to
re-establish the ancient constitution of Bohemia.

It is significative of the sj5irit which animated the new
rulers of Bohemia that though it had been decided that the
"new ordinance of the land" should be published in
Bohemian, German and Latin, only the German version
was printed. This leads us to consider another great change
in the condition of Bohemia, which resulted from the battle
of the Bila Hora, but which has proved less permanent than
many others. It is probable that with the exception of the
earliest period Bohemia always had a certain number of
German inhabitants, and the Jews who arrived very early in
Bohemia at all times preferred German to the national
language. The number of German inhabitants in Bohemia
varied according to the political situation of the country,
but the Germans were always considered as foreigners
1 In Bohemian " inkolat.''

294 Bohemia

dwelling in the land. The Diet of 1615 had recently
published new enactments favourable to the national
language.^ Even after the battle of the White Mountain, a
German prince, John George, Elector of Saxony, had when
writing to Ferdinand stated that a German in Bohemia was
to be treated as a " guest and stranger." ^ In this respect a
complete change took place. It has already been mentioned
that the German language was granted equal rights with the
national one, and as- the new judges and officials appointed
by Ferdinand often knew little or no Bohemian, the German
language shortly after it had been admitted obtained prefer-
ence to that of the country.

Another circumstance that contributed largely to the
decline of the Bohemian language was the system of land-
confiscation which the Imperialists carried out on a gigantic
scale. Almost the whole of the ancient nobility of Bohemia
was deprived of its estates. The first confiscations touched
only those who had — sometimes under compulsion — recog-
nized the government of King Frederick. The later
confiscations, however, included all who did not conform to
the Roman creed, even if they had always continued
faithful to the house of Habsburg. More than half the
landed property in Bohemia was confiscated, and of the
larger estates in the country only one hundred and forty-
seven remained in the hands of their previous owners.^
These were principally Bohemian Romanists such as Slavata,
Martinic, and Waldstein, who at this moment laid the
foundation of his vast fortune. The place of the ancient
Bohemian nobles who were driven, often penniless, into
exile was taken by a very motley company, consisting mainly
of Imperial courtiers and generals. We find among these
men of various nations — Germans, Spaniards, Walloons,
Italians, and, after the fall of Waldstein, Scotchmen and
Irishmen. All, however, shared a common devotion to the
Church of Rome, and a common hatred of the Bohemian
nation. These men were almost all ignorant of the
Bohemian language, which indeed they despised as the

1 See Chapter VII.

2 " Gast und Fremdling." Letter of the Elector of Saxony to

Ferdinand dated 2^^^^^^ 1622 quoted by Gindely, Geschichie der

November 5
Gegenrefoviiation in Bbhmen.

' Dr. Bflek, Dejiny Konfskaci v C^echdch (History of the Confiscations
in Bohemia).

An Historical Sketch 295

language of heretics. It was mainly in the interest of these
intruders and of the members of the Roman Church on whom
vast estates had been bestowed and among whom there
were at first hardly any Bohemians, that the new regulations
in favour of the German language were established.

A yet greater change took place in the Bohemian towns.
The numerous Protestants, mostly of the Bohemian nation-
ality, who had inhabited these towns and who had refused
to apostatize were driven into exile, and they were replaced
by German immigrants belonging to the Church of Rome.
Many Bohemian towns such as Litomefice and Louny,i
formerly national strongholds during the Hussite wars, now
became German and have continued so up to the present
day.

While the nobles and citizens, who wished to preserve
their religious convictions, were at least allowed to leave
their country, though often in a state of complete destitution,
no such option was granted to the peasants whom serfdom
attached to the soil, for the cultivation of which they were
required. They were to remain there, but to remain there
as Romanists. Serfdom now only appeared in its full
horror. The new landowners punished with fiendish
cruelty all who did not regularly attend at Mass or avoided
receiving communion according to the Roman rites.

It has already been mentioned that the Imperial arms
were generally victorious during the years that immediately
followed the battle of the White Mountain. These successful
campaigns confirmed Ferdinand in his plan of restoring the
Roman supremacy not only in Bohemia, but also in Ger-
many. Recent research proved that the Emperor began
about this time to cherish such far-reaching plans. The
Imperial power had, in Germany, receded for centuries, and
the princes had to an ever-increasing extent assumed the
position of sovereign powers. It appears very probable that
the Emperor, who knew how completely the Spanish branch
of his family had succeeded in establishing absolutism in
Spain, hoped to achieve a similar constitutional change in
Germany. Ferdinand was greatly encouraged in these
ambitious plans by his powerful general Albert of Wald-
stein.

Though it would be very tempting to search for a new
solution of the Waldstein problem — one of the strangest
^ In German * * Leitmeritz " and *' Laun."

296

Bohemia

enigmas of history ^ — the purpose and scope of this work
preclude an attempt to do so here. Yet the career of the
great Bohemian warrior must be briefly deUneated here.
Albert of Waldstein — born in 1583 — belonged to one of the
oldest families of the Bohemian nobility, which traced its
origin as far back as the thirteenth century. His family had
accepted the utraquist creed, but after the early death of
his parents he was educated in the tenets of the Bohemian
Brethren, by his uncle. Lord Henry of Slavata. After the
death of this uncle another relation, who now became his
guardian, sent him to the Jesuit school at Olomouc, where
he soon adopted the Roman creed. None of these changes
of religion appear to have been even to the slightest extent
founded on conviction. The fact that Waldstein was a
devotee to astrology renders it probable that he was imbued
with the spirit of superstition which is so often found in
conjunction with religious agnosticism. Waldstein then
visited several universities, staying longest at that of Padua.
It is hardly fanciful to suggest that the tales of the great
Italian adventurers and condottieri of the cinquecento which
he must have frequently heard, made a great impression on
the mind of a young man so thoroughly imbued with
ambition as was Waldstein. On his return to his native
land Waldstein married a rich widow and thus became
owner of large possessions in Moravia, and a member of the
Estates of that country. As he was related to Charles of
Zerotin, then the most influential noble of Moravia, Wald-
stein through his protection was soon able to play a consider-
able part in the politics of the country. When the Estates
of Moravia took up arms against Rudolph II and supported
King Matthew, 2 Waldstein was given the command of a
cavalry regiment. When, however, in 16 19 the Bohemian
forces invaded Moravia, Waldstein did not follow the
example of the other nobles, most of whom joined the
Bohemians, but remained faithful to the Imperial cause.

1 Since the revival of historical study in Bohemia, the historians of
that country have larg^ely devoted their attention to the career of their
great countryman. The late Professor Rezek wrote that the more he
studied the history of Waldstein, the less did the great condottiere
appeal to his sympathy. It is stated that vi^hen Palacky was examining
a monument to Waldstein, which had then been recently erected in
Vienna, he long contemplated the statue in silence, and then expressed
his judgment in the one word : " darebak ! " (scoundrel).

2 See Chapter VII.

An Historical Sketch 297

The soldiers whom he commanded, mostly utraquists, joined
the Bohemians, and Waldstein was obliged to seek refuge
at the Imperial court of Vienna, accompanied only by a
few horsemen. He thus laid the foundation of the great
favour which he long enjoyed at the court of Ferdinand.
He took part in the campaign which ended with the battle
of the Bila Hora, and was noted for the great severity, and
indeed cruelty, with which he maintained order in Prague
after the city had capitulated to the Imperialists.

Waldstein seized the opportunity of the vast confiscations
of Bohemian estates which took place after the battle of
the White Mountain to acquire an enormous fortune. As
a favourite of the Emperor he was able to purchase at an
almost nominal price vast estates which had belonged to
exiled Protestants. The expense incurred by Waldstein
was still further diminished by the fact that he had, together
with Prince Liechtenstein, Austrian governor of Bohemia,
and other Imperial courtiers, authorized the Jew Bassewi to
introduce an adulterated coinage into Bohemia, in which
all payments were made by those who enjoyed the favour of
the court of Vienna. Though he had thus become a very
w^ealthy man and one of the greatest landowners in Bohemia,
Waldstein continued to serve in the Imperial army, which
principally through his military talent obtained brilliant
victories. Waldstein was successful against the Hungarian
army of Bethlen Gabor, and also defeated in Moravia and
Silesia the forces of the Margrave of Jagerndorf and of
Count Thurn. Through these victories the Imperialists,
however, obtained but a short respite. The ever-increasing
conviction that the total destruction of Protestantism was the
real aim of the Habsburg dynasty, induced all Protestant
princes consecutively to oppose Ferdinand. When in 1625
the King of Denmark attacked the Emperor, Waldstein not
only undertook the command of the Imperial forces, but he
also, by granting Ferdinand a very large loan, enabled him
to raise a considerable army. As Gindely has well pointed
out, the dependence of the Emperor on Waldstein was a
result of the continued financial difficulties that confronted
Ferdinand. He was always lavish of gifts to all priests
and monks, and even in moments of the greatest financial
distress insisted on maintaining a large and expensive court
and household. Ferdinand may have been impressed by
the example of his Spanish kinsmen who had succeeded

298

Bohemia

in transforming into courtiers the former nobles of their
country — a result that of course was favourable to the
absolutist policy of the house of Habsburg.

In the new campaign Waldstein was again victorious.
He defeated at Dessau the army of Mansfeld, who was
acting in alliance with the King of Denmark. Waldstein
was now at the acme of his power. He treated the German
princes with studied discourtesy, when they attempted to
complain of the depredations committed by his troops.
This was by no means displeasing to the absolutist courtiers
of Ferdinand. In 1625 Waldstein received from the
Emperor the title of prince, and in 1627 that of Duke of
Friedland. The town of Jicin near Friedland in Bohemia
became the centre of his vast dominions. He here exercised
almost sovereign power and obtained the right of coining
money ; disregarding the Imperial decrees, he continued to
tolerate Protestants in his territory and even employed
them in his service. Of all the fantastic plans attributed
to Waldstein, that of becoming King of Bohemia, particu-
larly according to recent research, appears to be the only
one that seriously entered into his mind. After the defeat
of the King of Denmark the Emperor conferred on Waldstein
the two duchies of Mecklenburg, as the rulers of these lands
had been allies of the Danes. As Northern Germany was
Very shortly afterwards overrun by the Swedes this gift
proved somewhat a barren honour. It, however, granted to
Waldstein the then very extensive rights and powers of a
sovereign prince of the empire, and Waldstein's defenders
have often laid stress on this when attempting to justify the
negotiations with foreign powers into which he afterwards
entered.

These repeated successes of the Imperial arms naturally
encouraged the extreme adherents of Rome, who were
always very powerful at Ferdinand's court. The impetuous
confessor Lamormain assured his Imperial master that he
would imperil his soul if he did not at least partially intro-
duce in Germany those reforms that had already been
carried out so successfully in Bohemia. The result of these
counsels was the famed "Edict of Restitution" which the
Emperor after considerable hesitation signed on March 6,
1629. This enactment decreed that all monasteries and
ecclesiastical possessions of which the Romanists had been
deprived since the so-called "interim" of Passau in 1552

An Historical Sketch 299

and the additional treaty of Augsburg in 1555 should be
restored to them. The Romanist owners after their return
were to be granted the right then belonging to all territorial
lords in Germany, of obliging their new subjects to conform
to their creed. During a period of nearly 80 years these
possessions had frequently changed hands, and the edict
would have reduced thousands of men to beggary and
violated the religious convictions of hundreds of thousands.
Had such a law been carried out — Gindely writes — North
Germany would have been obliged to suffer a system of
confiscation and anti-reformation, similar to that under
which Bohemia was then groaning. Waldstein did not
hesitate openly to blame the edict, and the Jesuits, Lamor-
main in particular, henceforth became his bitterest enemies.
It was largely in consequence of this circumstance that
when the German princes at the Diet which was held at
Regensburg in 1630 demanded that Waldstein should be
deprived of his command, Ferdinand consented to this
with very little hesitation. Waldstein made no attempt to
retain his command. He retired to Bohemia, where he
lived partly in the magnificent palace which he had built at
Prague, partly on his vast estates.

The triumph of Catholicism in Northern Germany was
short-lived. On July 6, 1630, Gustavus Adolphus, King of
Sw^eden, landed on the island of Usedom and in a very short
time subdued a large part of Northern Germany. It is
not my purpose to refer here to the events of the Thirty
Years' War, except on the not infrequent occasions when
they had a direct influence on the fate of Bohemia. After
the Elector of Saxony had — abandoning his former allies —
joined the Swedish king, the combined Protestant armies
decisively defeated the forces of the Imperialists and
the German Romanists at Breitenfeld near Leipzig on
September 17, 1631.

After his great victory Gustavus Adolphus hesitated v/hat
course to pursue. Some of his councillors advised him to
march from Saxony directly into Bohemia and Moravia,
whence the road to Vienna lay open. Many of Waldstein's
generals had followed their chief into retirement and had
dismissed their soldiers. The population of Bohemia and
Moravia, which had endured ten years of incessant persecu-
tion, was bitterly disaffected to the Habsburg dynasty and
to the Roman clergy. There is little doubt that an invasion

300 Bohemia

of the Habsburg dominions would at this moment have
proved successful. The very numerous Bohemian exiles —
sanguine, as all exiles are — believed that their ancient inde-
pendent kingdom would now be re-established.

For reasons which it is not easy to comprehend, the king
of Sweden determined to march into Southern Germany,
and to leave the task of occupying Bohemia to his Saxon
allies. The Saxon invasion of Bohemia was carried out in
a very half-hearted fashion. The Elector, a worthy man of
very limited intelligence, disliked the Swedes as being
foreigners in Gerrpany, and had reluctantly taken up arms
against the Emperor, whom he considered his liege-lord,
because of the Edict of Restitution and because of the
depredations committed in Saxony by the Imperial troops.
In the autumn of the year 1631 the Saxon troops entered
Bohemia, and on November 1 1 they occupied Prague, the
city surrendering without offering any resistance. With the
Saxon troops many Bohemian exiles. Count Thurn, Vences-
las of Ruppa, chancellor during the reign of Frederick, and
others returned to Bohemia. One of the first acts of the
exiles after their return was to remove the heads of their
comrades — executed on June 21, 1621 — which the Imperial-
ists had exposed on the bridge tower of the old town. They
were then solemnly buried in the Tyn church. The Jesuits
were again expelled from Bohemia, and eighty clergymen
belonging to the Lutheran Church and to the unity of the
Bohemian Brethren met at the Carolinum college to
deliberate on the re-establishment of the utraquist Church.
The Elector of Saxony, who now also arrived at Prague,
seems for a moment to have intended to put himself in
possession of the Bohemian crown, which, both in his own
time and in that of his ancestors, appeared on several
occasions to be within the reach of the Protestant princes
of the house of Saxony. Should such a scheme, however,
prove impracticable, the Lutheran Elector far preferred the
continuation of Habsburg rule in Bohemia to the establish-
ment of a Calvinistic kingdom in the immediate neighbour-
hood of his electorate. The distinctly hostile attitude which
Arnim, who commanded the Saxon army, took up with
regard to Thurn and the other Bohemian exiles, can be
accounted for in this manner only.^

In his desperate position the Emperor decided to appeal
1 This is well shown in Dr. Irmet's J^oAanu Georg von Arnim.

An Historical Sketch 301

again to Waldstein. The latter had left Prague before the
arrival of the Saxons in that city and retired to his estates,
which the enemy did not occupy. Arnim, the Saxon com-
mander, had formerly served under Waldstein's orders and
had remained on terms of intimacy with him. Before
retiring to his estates Waldstein had an interview with
Arnim at the castle of Kounic, between Prague and Nym-
burk. Waldstein informed the Emperor of this interview,
but we have no reliable account of the conversation between
the two generals. Several letters addressed by Waldstein
to Arnim at this time have indeed been preserved, but they
have no great importance, and contain little except requests
that palaces belonging to Waldstein should not be injured by
the Saxon soldiers. From Prague Waldstein first proceeded
to Jicin, the capital of his Bohemian territory, and then to
Znoymo in Moravia. He here met Prince Eggenberg, one
of the most trusted councillors of Ferdinand. Eggenberg,
in the name of the Emperor, begged Waldstein to resume
the command of the Imperial forces. A similar proposal had
already been made to him in a less formal manner at the
beginning of the Saxon invasion. Waldstein finally con-
sented, but only after the Emperor had agreed to sign a docu-
ment which enumerated and accepted all the conditions
which the Duke of Friedland had made. The document
was destroyed after the death of Waldstein, and this transac-
tion, like so many other facts concerning the last years of
the Duke of Friedland, is shrouded in impenetrable mystery.
It is supposed that the Emperor granted Waldstein unlimited
command over all the Imperial armies and the right of con-
cluding peace with the enemies of the empire, and that he
promised to grant the Duke of Friedland one of the lands in
possession of the house of Habsburg, if he was not able to
recover the duchies of Mecklenburg. The land referred to
can only have been Bohemia, a considerable part of which
was already in Waldstein's hands.

I do not belong to those writers who have recently
attempted to defend Waldstein — some because they see in
him a friend of German unity, others from the directly
opposite reason that they believe him to have been at heart
a Bohemian patriot. I can see no solid foundation for
either conjecture. We have evidence to prove that Wald-
stein attempted to enter, through the mediation of Count
Thurn, into negotiations with King Gustavus Adolphus of

302 Bohemia

Sweden, though these negotiations were soon broken off. It
is equally certain that through Count Kinsk)^, one of the
principal Bohemian exiles, Waldstein promised Feuquieres,
the French minister at Dresden, that he would abandon
the Imperial cause if the French Government recognized
him as King of Bohemia. It must be admitted, in justice,
that Waldstein was confronted by treachery as deep as his
own. If Father Lamormain and the other Jesuits who, far
more than his official councillors, were the real advisers of
Ferdinand, approved of his conferring such extensive powers
on the Duke of Friedland, they undoubtedly did so with the
mental reservation that the duke could, when the danger of
a Swedish invasion had passed, again be deprived of his
command, or be " removed," should he offer any resistance.
There was nothing in the Spanish policy then pursued by
the court of Vienna which was in contradiction to such a
plan.^

Immediately after Waldstein had resumed his command,
the Imperial armies obtained brilliant successes. Entering
Bohemia in April 1632, Waldstein attacked Prague on
May 22, and recaptured the town after a very slight resistance.
The enemies evacuated the whole of Bohemia except part
of the mountainous district close to the Saxon frontier.
From Prague Waldstein marched to Cheb, and his army was
here joined by the forces of the Elector Maximilian of
Bavaria. The united Catholic armies now attempted to stem
the advance of Gustavus Adolphus. The King of Sweden,
after his victory at Breitenfeld, had victoriously overrun
almost all the south German lands. Numerous German
princes, among them Frederick of the Palatinate, had joined
him. Through the influence of the former King of Bohemia
numerous English volunteers had taken service in the
Swedish army. Waldstein unsuccessfully attempted to storm
the Swedish fortifications at Niirnberg, and he was also
defeated at the battle of Liitzen (Nov. 6, 1633) when Gustavus
Adolphus fell. The great confusion in the Swedish army,
which was a natural consequence of the death of the king,
enabled Waldstein to retire with his army in good order into

^ The correspondence of Father Quiroga, confessor to the empress —
a Spanish Infanta — with the Spanish Government, relating to the plan
of bribing assassins to murder King Gustavus Adolphus, has been pub-
lished. The correspondence only ceased after the death of the King of
Sweden at Liitzen.

An Historical Sketch 303

Bohemia. He took up his winter quarters at Prague, and
apparently taking no further interest in the progress of the
war, busied himself with the administration of his duchy of
Friedland, which he appears to have considered as the
nucleus of his future Bohemian kingdom. Even when
spring began and Waldstein should, according to the then
usual system of warfare, have resumed hostilities, he for a
considerable time hesitated to do so. At this moment the
intrigues against Waldstein at the court of Vienna had already
become very persistent. The Jesuits bitterly blamed the
Duke of Friedland's indifference to religious matters and his
reluctance to free Southern Germany from its Protestant
oppressors.

Other meaner motives also influenced many of Waldstein's
enemies. The generals and courtiers of Ferdinand viewed
with envy the vast fortune and the numerous estates of the
Duke of Friedland. They had decided to divide them
among themselves as soon as Waldstein had been convicted
of treason.^ The latter was thoroughly aware of these
machinations, which, according to his views, justified him in
continuing his negotiations with the enemies of the
Emperor.

In consequence of the repeated remonstrances of Fer-
dinand, Waldstein, on May 3, at last left Prague and,
marching by way of Kralove Hradec, entered Silesia, which
was then occupied by Swedish and Saxon troops under
Thurn and Arnim. Waldstein's army was considerably
superior in number to that of his opponents, and the
Catholics looked forward with certainty to a great victory.
They were, however, disappointed. Waldstein sent Count
Trcka, one of his confidants, to the Saxon camp with the
order to suggest to Arnim an interview between the two
commanders. Waldstein and Arnim met on June 6,^ but
it does not appear that the generals arrived at an under-
standing. The Duke of Friedland, however, declared him-
self in favour of religious freedom both in Bohemia and in
Germany. An armistice of a fortnight was concluded, and

^ This is very clearly proved by Dr. Schebeck in his Ldsung der
Wallensttivfrage.

2 According to Gindely it is only from this moment that any positive
treason on the part of Waldstein can be proved. In a work of the
extent of the present one, it cannot be attempted to solve the mystery
which surrounds Waldstein's fall.

304 Bohemia

it was afterwards prolonged to July 16. This naturally
caused great indignation in Vienna. The Emperor sent
new envoys to remonstrate with Waldstein, and these agents
succeeded in obtaining from two of his eminent generals —
Piccolomini and Gallas — the promise that they would
remain faithful to the Emperor " should Waldstein for reason
of health, or other causes, give up the command of the
Imperial armies." On August 22, Waldstein had another
interview with Arnim. He here appears to have spoken
very openly. He declared that it was his intention to rise
in arms against the Emperor and to restore to the Bohemian
Estates the free right of electing their sovereign. He also
offered to assist the Swedes should they attack the Elector
Maximilian of Bavaria — Waldstein's old enemy.

It is a proof of the tortuous policy of the Duke of Fried-
land that, after having spent the summer of the year 1633 in
negotiating with the enemies of the Emperor, he should have
attacked them in the autumn of that year. It is probable
that the " perfidia plus quam Punica " of Waldstein which
was noted even at a period when treachery and statesmanship
were almost identical, caused the Protestant leaders to meet
his overtures with some distrust. It appears certain that
Oxenstierna, who since the death of the king directed the
foreign policy of Sweden, distrusted the Duke of Friedland.
The latter, thinking it advisable to show that his skill and
strength had not decreased, attacked the Swedish forces
in Silesia that were then commanded by Count Thurn.
Waldstein was again victorious. He defeated the Swedish
forces at Steinau on October 11, and then returned to
Bohemia to winter there. His success for a time silenced
his enemies, but when it became known that the Swedish
and German Protestant forces under Duke Bernhard of
Weimar had on November 15 obtained possession of the
important city of Regensburg, Waldstein, who had refused
to march to the aid of his old enemy the Elector of Bavaria,
was doomed. The Emperor, not entirely unmindful of the
great services formerly rendered to him by the Duke of
Friedland, determined to make an attempt to induce him
voluntarily to resign his command. For this purpose he
sent Father Quiroga, the Empress's confessor, to Waldstein's
camp, but the latter absolutely declined to give his de-
mission. He had at this moment undoubtedly already
decided to join the Emperor's enemies. He, however, well

An Historical Sketch 305

knew how important it was for his future plans that he
should join the Saxons or Swedes as leader of a powerful
and devoted army and not as a friendless fugitive. On
January 12, 1634, Waldstein gave a great banquet to his
principal generals and officers at Plzeii, which was then his
headquarters. He requested all present to sign a document
which stated that Waldstein was tired of his command, but
that his generals formally declared that they would accept
him only as their commander up to the moment when the
Emperor had fully satisfied all the claims of Waldstein and
his generals on the Imperial treasury. This declaration
was signed by all present. Even if we interpret it in the
most lenient fashion the document declared that the
Emperor's right of dismissing his commander-in-chief was
dependent on certain conditions. This undoubtedly con-
stituted an act of mutiny.

Though the declaration was signed by all present, a con-
siderable number of Waldstein's generals had previously
entered into negotiations with the court of Vienna. Wald-
stein seems to have felt that he was not so sure of his army
as he had previously believed. The negotiations with Ferdi-
nand's enemies also proceeded but slowly, as Arnim, Wald-
stein's principal confidant, had great trouble in* obtaining
definite assurances from the irresolute Elector of Saxony.
Waldstein therefore endeavoured to gain time, and to allay
the suspicions of the Emperor. At a second banquet at
Plzen ^ on February 20, a paper was signed by the generals
declaring that they would continue to be faithful to
Waldstein and to obey his orders, and that they — together
with him — would continue loyally to serve the Emperor.

It was, however, too late. On February 13 all commu-
nications between the Emperor and his general ceased. On
February 18 the Emperor declared Waldstein and his
generals Illo and Trcka to be traitors and ordered the army
to obey only Gallas, Piccolomini and Maradas. At the
same time the preachers in Vienna received the order to
denounce Waldstein from their pulpits as a "traitor and
tyrant." At the last moment Waldstein's new allies also
began to move. On February 18 the Elector of Saxony
agreed to a treaty of alliance with Waldstein and sent
Arnim to Plzen. Waldstein had, however, left Plzen before

^ Many writers on Waldstein have overlooked the fact that there
were two banquets at Plzefi.
L

3o6

Bohemia

the Saxon envoy could arrive there. On February i, King
Louis XIII of France instructed Feuquieres, his minister at
Dresden, to inform Waldstein that if he definitely broke with
the Emperor, France would grant him an annual subsidy of
a million hvres and support his claim to the Bohemian
throne. Before De la Boderie, Feuquieres' secretar)^, who
was entrusted with this message, could reach Bohemia,
Waldstein was dead.

The Duke of Friedland had undoubtedly intended to
march on Prague as soon as the complete rupture with the
Emperor had taken place. A born Bohemian, he knew the
veneration which all Bohemians felt for the capital of their
country, and — no doubt rightly — beHeved that his prestige
would be greatly increased by the occupation of Prague.
He had recently shown himself more favourable to the
national cause and had entered into negotiations with the
very numerous Bohemian exiles, who up to the end of the
Thirty Years' War hoped once more to return to their native
land. The successive desertions of most of his troops obliged
Waldstein to change his plans. He sent a message to Duke
Bernhard of Weimar, begging him to send a small force to
Cheb which he would join with all the troops that were still
true to him. Waldstein himself proceeded to that town on
February 23, accompanied only by ten squadrons of
cavalry and 300 musqueteers. The departure from Plzen
appeared to the contemporary writers rather as a flight
than as the march of an organized army. At the decisive
moment of his life, when only full bodily and mental power
rendered possible the success of Waldstein's perilous adven-
ture, he was prostrated by a violent attack of gout. On his
arrival at Cheb he was unable to come to a decision with
regard to his future plans. An Imperial decree had mean-
while set a price on the head of Waldstein, and a conspiracy
was immediately formed among the — mostly Scotch and
Irish — officers of the garrison of Cheb. These men, of
whom Butler, Gordon, Leslie and Devereux were the
leaders, determined to invite the principal officers still faith-
ful to Waldstein — Kinsk)^, Trcka and Illo — to a banquet at
the castle. When they arrived there the castle was im-
mediately surrounded in every direction by the Irish
dragoons, and Waldstein's officers were attacked and mur-
dered after a short but valiant defence. Waldstein, who was
still suffering from gout, had not taken part in the banquet.

An Historical Sketch 307

but immediately after the murders Colonel Butler and
Captain Devereux hurried to his residence. He was quite
unprepared and was immediately assassinated by Captain
Devereux (February 25).

The fall of Waldstein ^ was followed by a new series of
extensive confiscations in Bohemia. The numerous estates
of the Duke of Friedland and bis principal adherents were
seized by the Imperial government and were granted to the
generals of Waldstein who had remained faithful to the
Emperor, and to the officers who had taken part in the
murder of Waldstein. We now find several Irish and
Scotch names among the new owners of Bohemian estates.

The events that immediately followed the death of the
Duke of Friedland certainly speak for the wisdom of the
Jesuits who had demanded his recall. King Ferdinand III,
son of the Emperor Ferdinand, took the command of the
Imperial armies, and it was decided to pursue an energetic
policy against Sweden and France while endeavouring to
negotiate with the Elector of Saxony. The Swedish chancellor
Oxenstierna attempted meanwhile to unite the Protestant
principalities and free towns of Germany for the purpose of
combined action. Their representatives met under his
presidency at Frankfurt on April 7, 1634. All parts of
Protestant Germany were represented, and the Bohemian
exiles also sent envoys who requested aid against Ferdinand.
The Elector of Saxony was also represented, but his envoys
maintained an attitude of distrust to Sweden, endeavouring
to separate that country from its German allies. Whatever
hopes Oxenstierna may have had were dissipated by the
great victory which the Romanists, led by two princes
of the house of Habsburg — King Ferdinand III and the
Cardinal Infanta Don Fernando — obtained at Nordlingen
on September 5 and 6, 1634. For a moment it appeared as
if all the results of the victories of Gustavus Adolphus had
been lost.

^ The projects of Waldstein have recently been stated very clearly by
Professor Pekar in his masterly work, Dejiny Walctstynskiho Spiknuii
(history of Waldstein's conspiracy). Waldstein, an unscrupulous con-
dottiere, can by no means be considered as a Bohemian patriot. Being
Bohemian he was, however, fully aware of the great disaffection that
still existed in his country, and he intended to use it to obtain the
Bohemian crown. This is particularly proved by the close relations
which he in the last years of his life entertained with the Bohemian
exiles.

3o8

Bohemia

The Elector of Saxony, always secretly opposed to the
interference of Sweden in the affairs of Germany, had even
before the battle of Nordlingen begun to negotiate with the
Emperor in view of a treaty of peace. His representatives
met those of the Emperor at Litomefice on June 15. These
negotiations did not, however, put an immediate stop to the
hostilities between the two countries, and the Saxons united
with the Swedes attacked Bohemia a few weeks later. The
Swedish general Baner marched as far as the White Moun-
tain near Prague, but the news of the battle of Nordlingen
obliged him to retreat hastily from Bohemia.

In the following year the prolonged negotiations between
the Emperor and the Elector of Saxony were at last brought
to a conclusion. Lusatia was definitely ceded to Saxony,
and the Edict of Restitution was, as far as it concerned the
Lutherans, greatly modified. No provisions were made to
secure toleration for the Calvinists as their bitter enemy,
the court chaplain Hoe, still had great influence with the
Elector. As regards the Bohemian Protestants, Ferdinand
assumed the intransigent attitude which he afterwards main-
tained during the negotiations which preceded the peace of
Westphalia. The Emperor positively refused to allow the
presence of any Protestant in Bohemia or Moravia. In
Silesia the Protestants were to remain unmolested and to
retain the use of a few churches. These assurances were,
with the tacit connivance of the court of Vienna, frequently
violated by the local officials. The agreement between
Austria and Saxony was signed at Prague on May 30, 1635,
and was followed immediately by a treaty of alliance between
the two countries.

Ferdinand II died early in the year 1637, and was suc-
ceeded by his son Ferdinand III, who had during his
father's lifetime been crowned as King of Bohemia. The
Thirty Years' War continued with alternating success during
the first twelve years of the reign of the new ruler. In 1639
the Swedes under their able general Baner again invaded
Bohemia. A considerable number of Bohemian exiles again
accompanied the Swedish army, and when Baner declared
that he entered Bohemia as a protector of the freedom of
the Protestants, he was enthusiastically welcomed by many
Bohemian peasants. After capturing Podmokli/ Usti and
Litomefice, Baner advanced on Prague. The "Catholic
» In German "Bodenbach."

An Historical Sketch 309

Reformation " had, however, during the many years that had
elapsed since the battle of Bila Hora made great progress,
and the Swedes were not in all parts of Bohemia received
as well as they had perhaps expected. Though Baner in
the year 1639 twice encamped before Prague, he did not
attack the city. The Swedish troops committed great depre-
dations in Bohemia. They spared only the property of the
Bohemian Protestants, already a minority of the population,
though many returned to their ancient faith as soon as
they were able to do so with impunity. The events of
the Thirty Years' War shortly afterwards obliged the Swedes
to retire from Bohemia, and the "Catholic Reformation"
was now carried out with renewed vigour. A war broke out
between Sweden and Denmark in 1644 and obliged the
Swedes to devote their attention to lands nearer to their
home. In 1645, however, Bohemia was again invaded by
a Swedish army under General Torstensohn. Sweden had
then concluded an alliance with George Rakoczy, Prince of
Transylvania, who was marching on Vienna. Should the
Swedish forces join him before that city it would be possible
— to use a well-worn expression — "to strike a blow at the
heart of the Habsburg empire." ^ Torstensohn decided to
march from Saxony on Vienna through Southern Bohemia,
and he obtained a great victory over the Imperial forces at
Jankov, near Tabor, on March 6,1645. The few Protestants
who still remained in Bohemia again joined the Swedes,
but their far-reaching plans at this moment prevented them
from intervening in the affairs of Bohemia. Torstensohn
succeeded in joining the forces of Rakoczy before Vienna,
but Austria was saved by the intervention of the Porte.
The Ottoman Empire forced Rakoczy to come to terms
with the Emperor by menacing him with an attack on Tran-
sylvania should he refuse to do so. In 1648 the last events of
the Thirty Years' War took place at Prague— the city where
the war had begun. A Swedish army under General Konigs-
mark entered Bohemia, and by treachery obtained posses-
sion of the Mala Strana, the part of the town situated on
the left bank of the Vltava. The repeated attempts of the

^ These words were first used by Count Usedom, then Prussian
minister in Florence, in 1866. He advised the Italian government to
carry on the war against Austria as far as the Danube, where th- ir
forces could join those of Prussia, and then "frapper au coeur " the
Austrian empire.

3IO Bohemia

Swedes to obtain possession of the other parts of the city
were, however, unsuccessful. The bridge of Prague was
bravely defended by the numerous Jesuits and Capuchins
who had established themselves in Bohemia. They were
aided not only by the Imperial troops, but also by numerous
German immigrants, and even by citizens of Prague who
had recently joined the Roman Church and were more
mindful of their new religion than of their ancient country.^
The siege only terminated when the news of the peace of
Westphalia reached Prague. The last warlike occurrences
in that city, though very insignificant, had a very serious
political consequence. The late Professor Rezek was the
first to point out that the fact that Bohemians had them-
selves taken up arms against those who defended their
religious liberty, greatly weakened the case of those who at
Munster and Osnabriick upheld the cause of the Bohemian
Protestants.

The peace negotiations which had begun in 1643 only
terminated at the end of the year 1648 by the treaty of
Westphalia. It is here only necessary to mention that all
attempts made in favour of the Bohemian exiles entirely
failed. Though Ferdinand III was by the treaty of
Westphalia obliged to make many concessions, he resolutely
declared that they would continue the war rather than allow
the presence of a single Protestant in Bohemia or Moravia.
The slight privileges granted to the Protestants of Silesia
were, however, confirmed.

The rapidly decreasing band of Bohemian patriots who
through all turns of weal and woe had remained faithful to
their national Church rightly saw in the treaty of Westphalia
the ending of all their hopes. Komensky^ has recorded
their despair in his touching " Last will of that dying mother

^ This episode, whose consequences were, as mentioned above, very
important, has long filled with shame the minds of many Bohemian
patriots. The somewhat servile pliancy, occasionally, though not often,
found among Bohemians, was acutely characterized by the Emperor
Joseph II, no friend of Bohemia, but one of the most gifted princes
of the house of Habsburg. When visiting Prague he was shown the
church of St. Mary, erected on the White Mountain to celebrate the
victory of the Romanists. The Emperor expressed great displeasure,
and said he wished to reign over men, not over brutes (in German
"Bestien") who celebrated their own defeat.

2 For a brief account of the career of Komensky (Comenius), the last
bishop of the Bohemian Brethren, see my introduction to my translation
of his Labyrint Svela) The Labyrinth of the World).

An Historical Sketch 311

the unity of the (Bohemian) Brethren." ^ "I cannot," he
writes, "oh Bohemian and Moravian nation, my dear
country, forget thee now that I leave thee for ever." . . .
" I believe before God that when this storm of wrath
— which our sins have brought on us — has subsided, thou
wilt, oh Bohemian people, again obtain the control over thy
destiny. " With that intense devotion to the national
language which is so characteristic of the Bohemians,
Komensky writes, " I leave to thee (the community of the
Brethren) and thy sons the task of refining, purifying and
developing the beloved graceful language of our ancestors,
for the care which our sons devoted to this matter is known
from the time when all sensible men said that there was no
better Bohemian than that spoken by the Brethren and
written by them in their books." ^

There are few darker pages in the world's history than
those in which the state of Bohemia after the Thirty Years'
War is recorded. Almost every part of the country had been
devastated during that war. Many towns and countless
villages had been destroyed, and even at the present day
many now deserted spots are known to have once been
inhabited. The population of Bohemia, which at the begin-
ning of the Thirty Years' War had exceeded 3,000,000, had
dwindled to 800,000 at the end of that war. The country
had suffered more during this war than even during the
Hussite campaigns. The towns had lost the larger part of
their population. Among the exiled Protestants had been
almost all the prominent merchants and tradesmen, who
now sought refuge in distant countries.^ As of France
after the edict of Nantes, it can be said of Bohemia after the
Thirty Years' War that it suffered by the loss of its best citizens,
in such a manner that it can even now hardly be said to
have recovered. It is true that within the last generation
national industry and commerce have again begun to
flourish. Prague, recently the capital of a vast empire, after
the treaty of Westphalia acquired the aspect of a provincial

^ ** Ksaft umirajici matky jednoty bratrske."

2 -For the care devoted by the Bohemian Brethren to the development
of the national language, see my History of Bohemian Literature (2.
ed.), pp. 295-298.

'^ It is only recently that Bohemian historians have made researches
concerning these exiles who proceeded to Germany, England, the
United States, and other countries.

312 Bohemia

town, and this continued throughout the eighteenth century.^
The new nobility of Bohemia rarely visited Prague, and
resided mainly in Vienna in the vicinity of the court. The
new nobles, mostly men of modest and often mean birth,
who owed their fortune to the Thirty Years' War, were greatly
attracted by the splendour of that court, which in splendour
rivalled the court of Madrid. New titles were widely dis-
tributed among these men. The ancient nobility ot
Bohemia had been somewhat averse to the bearing of titles
of duke, count, or baron, considering them as German
dignities, and they had usually been merely described as
" pan " (lord). The generals and courtiers who now
replaced them naturally had no such repugnance. The fate
of the Bohemian peasantry in the period subsequent to the
peace of Westphalia was an unspeakably miserable one.
Frequent insurrections, which were repressed with merciless
cruelty, were the consequence. I rejoice that the extent of this
book relieves me from the duty of giving a detailed account
of the cruelties committed by an alien soldiery against almost
unarmed peasants. In a petition which the peasants of the
district of Caslav addressed to the Imperial authorities at
Prague they stated that "their fate was worse than that of
the slaves of the Tartars or Turks." It is but too true
that there was a considerable amount of truth in their com-
plaint. The agents whom the new Bohemian nobles —
almost always absentees — entrusted with the control of their
peasants were probably more cruel than the overseer of
Russian moujiks or the slave-driver of the southern States in
America. In Russia both master and man were generally
Slavs and members of the orthodox Church ; the southern
slave-driver often treated his slaves with contemptuous good
nature. But the agent of the German and Romanist nobles
of Bohemia both hated and despised the peasants — who
were Slavs, and often still secretly heretics. The Bohemian
peasants have since the year 1848 enjoyed complete liberty,
and the present organization of the village communities
grants them overwhelming power — often to the detriment of

^ In a curious letter written from Prague on November 7, 17 16, Lady
Mary Montague says that at Prague " there were some remains of its
former splendour," but that it was " old built and thinly inhabited." Of
the ladies she writes that they were dressed according ro the fashions of
Vienna, "after the manner that the people of Exeter imitate those of
London."

An Historical Sketch 313

the landowner. Yet the evil seed of hatred and distrust
sown by the oppressors of the seventeenth and eighteenth
century bears evil fruit up to the present day. Bohemian
peasants even now instinctively distrust the nobles of their
country, even if they belong to their own race, and are in
full sympathy with the national cause. This antagonism
has frequently contributed to the failure of the attempts of
the Bohemians to recover their autonomy.

The wars and negotiations of the court of Vienna at the
end of the seventeenth and during the eighteenth century
cannot be considered as forming part of Bohemian history.
Some large Bohemian landowners played a considerable
part in the government of the empire, but their only con-
nection V, ith Bohemia consisted in the fact that they drew
very large revenues from their estates situated in that
country. Every trace of municipal self-government gradu-
ally disappeared both in the cities of Prague and in the
other towns of the kingdom. The scanty contemporary
references to the internal condition of Bohemia record
only successfully repressed revolts of the peasantry, and
occasional religious persecutions when it was believed that
Protestants had secretly entered Bohemia. The extreme
zeal of the Jesuits, who sometimes extended their persecu-
tions to Silesia — where the Protestants possessed a limited
amount of independence — occasionally directed the atten-
tion of Europe to the almost forgotten lands of the Bohemian
crown. When King Charles XII of Sweden had defeated
King Augustus of Poland and pursued his enemy to his
hereditary Saxon electorate, he took up his quarters for a
considerable time at Alt-Ranstadt near Leipzig. It was here
brought to his notice that the Romanist priests had closed
the churches in Silesia which the treaty of Westphalia had
guaranteed to the Protestants. Charles, who was by inherit-
ance a guarantor of the treaty of Westphalia, was very indig-
nant at this breach of faith, and, impetuous as he always
was, he immediately meditated on a march on Vienna. The
envoys of the Austrian government who visited him, how-
ever, succeeded in pacifying him, and a treaty between
Austria and Sweden was signed at Alt-Ranstadt, which
assured to the Protestants of Silesia the preservation of
their former privileges.

About the middle of the eighteenth century a great
constitutional change affecting all the lands subject to the
L 2

314 Bohemia

house of Habsburg took place. Ferdinand III had in
1567 been succeeded as Roman Emperor by his son
Leopold I, who had previously already been crowned as
King of Bohemia. Leopold's successors were Joseph I,
and after his short reign Leopold's second son Charles VI
— or II — as King of Bohemia. Charles was a very worthy
prince, quite devoid of the cruelty which had stained the
reign of his father Leopold. A good father and husband
he was, according to the spiteful description of Frederick
the Great, not exempt from superstition.^ As he was the
last male representative of the house of Habsburg, the
principal purpose of his hfe was to assure the succession to
his throne to his daughter and to obtain general consent to
the future indivisibility of the Habsburg domains. This
had not always been the custom of that house. Thus
Ferdinand I had divided his dominions among his three
sons. In 1 7 13, only two years after his accession, Charles
issued a decree stating that in default of a male heir all the
Habsburg dominions should devolve undivided, and accord-
ing to primogeniture to his female descendants. In 1716
a son was born to the Emperor, but after his early death
Charles again devoted his whole energy to the purpose of
assuring the succession to his throne to his daughter Maria
Theresa.

However absolutist the Habsburg rule was at this period,
it was yet considered necessary to obtain the consent of the
Estates of Hungary, Bohemia, and even the so-called " here-
ditary lands," to this constitutional change. The matter
was brought before the Estates of Bohemia in 1720. The
" renewed ordinance of the land " had already established the
hereditary right of the house of Habsburg in the female as
well as in the male line. The new rule as to the succession
to the throne, therefore, involved no change in Bohemia,
and the Estates retained their right of electing a king, should
the Habsburg dynasty become extinct. The decree which
declared the indivisibility of all the Habsburg dominions
also found no opposition in an assembly consisting mainly
of Imperial courtiers and generals. On October 16, 1720,
the Estates of Bohemia unanimously accepted the Imperial
decree, which after it had also been accepted by the German

^ "Bon pere, bon mari, mais bigot et superstitieux comme tous les
princes de la niaison d'Autriche." {Frederic II Histoire de men temps^
tome I, p. 28, ed. 1788.)

An Historical Sketch 315

Imperial Diet became known as the ** pragmatic sanction."
Charles VI, who had also obtained the recognition of the
pragmatic sanction by all European powers, was at the
moment of his death, in 1740, justified in believing that he
had assured the succession to his daughter Maria Theresa,
who had married Francis, Duke of Lorraine, and afterwards
Grand Duke of Tuscany.

The Electors of Saxony and Bavaria,^ however, who had
both married daughters of the Emperor Joseph I, immedi-
ately refused to recognize Maria Theresa as Queen of Hun-
gary and Bohemia. They were, in accordance with the
traditional Bourbon policy, strongly supported by France,
which believed that the extinction of the male line of the
house of Habsburg would inevitably be followed by the
complete ruin of that dynasty. The court of Spain, closely
connected by relationship with that of France, also opposed
Maria Theresa, who found in England her only ally. A
considerable time was, however, required before these
numerous countries, whose interests were in so many re-
spects antagonistic, could determine on a joint action. Only
one prince, acting quite independently, decided to strike
immediately, and h4 alone eventually obtained great and
permanent advantages by means of the Austrian war of
succession.

Frederick II, King of Prussia, ascended the throne a
very short time before the death of Charles VI, and — as
he tells us in his Histoire de mon temps — he immediately
determined to seize the opportunity which presented itself.
Prussia had long coveted some parts of the lands of the
Bohemian crown. A prince who, like Frederick, repeatedly
expressed his contempt for the German language in very
strong words could find no objection to the acquisition of
lands in which a large part of the population did not speak
the language. The Prussian sovereigns had to a certain
extent favoured the Bohemian exiles who sought refuge in
their state, and Bohemian books were printed at Berlin, at
a time when it would have been impossible to do so at
Prague. These facts had not been forgotten, and Frederick

^ The claims of Bavaria were also founded on an older document, the
testament of the Emperor Ferdinand I. The matter cannot be further
discussed here, but it should be stated that the claims of the Elector of
Bavaria on the Bohemian throne were not so entirely unfounded as has
been stated by the court-historians of Vienna writing "to order."

3i6 Bohemia

found friends and secret sympathizers not only in Silesia,
but also in Bohemia itself, when he afterwards invaded that
country.^ Though himself an agnostic, Frederick the
Great was far too keen an observer not to have perceived
how greatly the religious difficulties in the Habsburg do-
minions favoured his venturesome enterprise. The treaty
of Westphalia had granted the Protestants of Silesia certain
privileges, but the Jesuits constantly encroached on these
privileges. After the treaty of Alt-Ranstadt and during
the reign of Joseph I, the Protestants had remained un-
molested, but during the last years of the rule of Charles
VI — and with his tacit approval — the Protestants of Silesia
had been forbidden to build schools, and their churches
had been coverted into barracks. Prussia had also here-
ditary rights on parts of Silesia. The Margrave of Jagern-
dorf, a prince of the house of Hohenzollern, had been de-
prived of dominions at the beginning of the Thirty Years' War,
and Leopold I had in 1675 taken possession of the duchies
of Liegnitz, Brieg, and Wohlan after the death of the last
Duke. Leopold declared the duchies to be vacant fiefs of
the Bohemian crown, though a treaty concluded by a former
Duke of Liegnitz assured the succession to the house of
Hohenzollern. Though Frederick the Great did not omit
to allude to his hereditary rights,^ his principal motive for
immediate action was probably the opportunity of the
moment.

Charles VI died on October 20, 1740, and on the 13th
of December of the same year Frederick and his army
crossed the borders of Silesia while negotiations were still
proceeding and without a formal declaration of war. It
was customary among historians of the older school to
denounce this act with a flood of virtuous indignation. It
is certain that Prussia had adhered to the pragmatic sanction,

^ Carlyle with the intuition of genius seems to have grasped this fact,
though the extensive recent Bohemian literature on this subject was, of
course, unknown to him. Thus he writes (under November 19, 1744),
*' This is the circle of Koniggratz, this that now lies to the rear ; and
happily there are a few Hussites in it not utterly indisposed to do a
little spying for us, and bring a glimmering glance of intelligence now
and then." {History of Frederick II of Prussia, commorJy called
FredericJz the Great, vol. viii. p. 56. )

' " II resolut aussitot de revendiguer-les principantes de la Silesie
auxquelles sa maison avait des droits incontestables." {Frederic II
Histoire de vwn temps, tome I, p. 125, edit, 1788.)

An Historical Sketch 317

but very recent events have proved that few statesmen
attach much importance to treaties in the absence of an
army sufficient to enforce their enactments. Since the times
of Frederick the Great, Charles Albert of Sardinia in 1848,
and the Japanese empire in 1904 — to quote but two examples
— have opened hostilities without a formal declaration of
war. It is probable that in consequence of the exigencies
of modern warfare this will in the future become more and
more customary. Silesia fell an easy prey to Frederick. He
immediately decreed that the Protestants should enjoy
complete equality of rights, but that the Romanists should
not be in any way molested. The Silesian Protestants
enthusiastically welcomed the Prussian troops, and the
Roman Catholics seeing that Frederick, whose agnosticism
assured his impartiality, did not intend to pursue a policy of
retaliation, soon found it advisable to accept the rule of
Frederick. Only the Austrian government officials, and
some members of the nobility who were closely connected
with the court of Vienna, left Silesia. The country had but
a small Austrian garrison, and with the exception of a few
fortresses fell almost immediately into the hands of the
King of Prussia, who, on January 3, 1741, made his
solemn entry into Breslau. In the following spring the
Austrians made an attempt to recover Silesia, but after a
complete defeat at Mollwitz on April 16, they were obliged
to retire into Moravia.

The armies of France, Saxony and Bavaria had meanwhile
began to move against the Habsburg States. Frederick in a
masterly diplomatic campaign, which has perhaps only been
rivalled by his countryman Bismarck, proved that he had no
wish to establish a French hegemony in Germany in succes-
sion to the Austrian one, or to increase largely the power
of Saxony — Prussia's old rival. He therefore chose this
moment for concluding an armistice with Maria Theresa.
Under the mediation of England a treaty was signed at
Klein Schnellendorf on October 9, 1741, by which Lower
Silesia and some smaller districts were ceded to Frederick.
The agreement was insincere on the part of both contrac-
tors. Frederick was determined, should the enemies of
Maria Theresa prove successful, to secure the whole of
Silesia and perhaps other parts of the lands of the Bohemian
crown as his share of the spoils. The Queen of Bohemia
and Hungary had firmly resolved, should her armies be

3i8

Bohemia

victorious, to drive the Prussians out of Silesia. As was
under these circumstances inevitable, the truce was of very
short duration.

In the autumn of the year 1741 the armies of France,
Bavaria and Saxony entered Bohemia from various directions.
Their armies joined before Prague and took the town by
assault on November 26. The Elector of Bavaria imme-
diately assumed the title of the King of Bohemia and was
solemnly crowned by the Archbishop of Prague in St.
Vitus' s cathedral on December 19. A general meeting
of the Estates also took place and members of most of the
families of the Bohemian nobility, such as Cernin, Kolovrat,
Kinsky, Liitzow, Lazansky, Waldstein and many others did
homage to their new king. On this occasion great festivities
took place at Prague, and the contemporary records of
them are not dissimilar to those which describe the
festivals on the accession of the equally ill-fated Frederick
of the Palatinate. The new king — Charles III, as King of
Bohemia — soon after his coronation at Prague left Bohemia
and proceeded to Frankfurt. He was here elected German
Emperor and assumed the title of Charles VII.

Almost from the moment that Charles had been crowned
as Emperor, his armies and those of his allies were un-
successful, and Maria Theresa, principally through the aid of
the Hungarians, was able to recover part of the lands which
she claimed. King Frederick of Prussia, feeling that the
Austrian victories might endanger bis possession of Silesia,
determined to end the short-lived armistice which he had
concluded with Maria Theresa. He entered the county of
Glatz, then an integral part of the kingdom of Bohemia, and
took Glatz, the capital of the county, by assault. From here
he marched through Eastern Bohemia to Moravia, and joined
the Saxon forces there. Saxony was at that moment already
more suspicious of Prussia than of Austria — with which
country it soon afterwards concluded a treaty of peace that
was at a short interval followed by an alliance between the
two countries. Seeing that no advantage could be obtained
by the junction with the Saxons, Frederick returned to
Eastern Bohemia, where he obtained a signal victory over
the Austrian forces under the Duke of Lorraine, at Chotusic,
near Caslav. Maria Theresa, still menaced by numerous
enemies, again decided to free herself from the one who
appeared most dangerous. After preliminary negotiations

An Historical Sketch 319

at Breslau, a treaty between Frederick the Great and Maria
Theresa was signed at Berlin, which ceded to Prussia the
county of Glatz and the whole of Silesia, with the exception
of the duchies of Teschen, Jagerndorf and Troppau. A third
of the lands of the Bohemian crown thus became subject to
the house of HohenzoUern.

Frederick the Great, who knew perhaps better than his
Austrian antagonists that even after the constitutional re-
volution of 1627 the Estates of Bohemia still possessed a
certain legislative power, demanded that the treaty of Berlin
should declare that all lands belonging to Prussia, which had
been held as fiefs of the Bohemian crown, should be freed
from that dependence, and that the Estates of Bohemia should
give their consent to the cession to Prussia of the lands that
had formerly belonged to the Bohemian crown. On July i6,
1743, the Bohemian Diet gave its sanction to these cessions,
and it could hardly have acted differently.^ The fact is none
the less important for the constitutional history of Bohemia.

As will be mentioned presently, peace between Frederick
the Great and Maria Theresa was again of short duration.
Principally in consequence of the aid she had obtained from
Hungary, Maria Theresa was everywhere victorious. The
Saxons, giving up all their former claims, had concluded an
alliance with the Queen of Hungary. Prague, however, was
still occupied by a large French garrison which held the
town for Charles of Bavaria. The troops of Maria Theresa
besieged the city, and Marshal Belleisle, who commanded the
French garrison, cut off from all communications with his
own country, was in a desperate position. He, however,

^ The two paragraphs of the treaty of Berlin which were read to the
Estates of Bohemia, and were sanciioned by them, ran thus —

Article XI. S.M. la Reine de Hongrie et de Boheme renonce tant
pour elle et pour ses heritiers et successeurs a perpetuiie et fera renoncer
apres la pacification ]es etats du Royaume de Boheme a tout droit
de relief, que la couronne de Boheme a exerce jusqu apresent sur plusieurs
etats villes et districts appartenant anciennement a la mai^on electorate
de Brandenbourg, de quelque nom, condition ou nature qu'ils puissant
etre, de sorte qu'ils reseront jamais plus regardes a I'avenir comme fiefs de
la couronne de Boheme, mais censes et declares libres de cette mouvance.

Article XII. Sa Majestela Reine de Hongrie et de Boheme s'engage
et promet d'obliger les etats de Boheme apres la pacification de donner
un acte de renonciation a tous les etats dependans autrefois de la
couronne de Boheme cedes par la presente paix a Sa Majeste le roy de
Prusse avec toute la ^souverainete et I'independance de la susdite
couronne. (Kalousek, Ceski Stdtni Prdvo (the Bohemian Constitution),
p. 63J.)

320 Bohemia

succeeded in retiring to Cheb (Eger) after a difficult and peril-
ous march across Bohemia in mid-winter. A small French
garrison under Chevet, which for a time remained in Prague,
was finally obliged to capitulate, but as the French general
threatened to blow up the town, together with his own posi-
tions within it, he obtained favourable conditions. He was
allowed to retire with his forces to Cheb and secured the
promise of an amnesty for the adherents of Charles VII — a
promise that was not kept by the Austrian authorities. On
September 7, 1743, the French evacuated Cheb, the last
Bohemian town that had remained in their possession.

Even before that date Maria Theresa determined to visit
Bohemia. She well knew the great importance which
Bohemians attach to the coronation of their sovereigns, and
she was therefore crowned at Prague on May 11. The
Queen declared the capitulation signed on Chevet's depar-
ture to be invalid, and a considerable number of Bohemian
noblemen and citizens were arrested. The principal ad-
herents of King Charles were severely punished, but it is
uncertain whether any capital executions took place. Maria
Theresa's experiences at the beginning of her reign in
Bohemia undoubtedly influenced her mind against the
inhabitants of that country, which she always somewhat
neglected in favour of her beloved Viennese. This dislike
to the Bohemians can be traced in all the new regulations
and enactments which the Queen published during the later
years of her reign. During her short stay at Prague the
Queen received the news of great victories of her armies.
After driving the enemy from Lower and Upper Austria
the — mainly Hungarian — forces of Maria Theresa had
victoriously occupied Munich and the whole of Bavaria.
Charles VII had sought refuge in Frankfurt, and the French
troops were gradually retiring across the Rhine. Frederick
the Great thought a new intervention on his part necessary.
He had never wished to increase the French influence in
Germany nor to render assistance to the dynastic ambitions
of Ba/varia or Saxony, but he rightly thought if the series of
Austrian victories continued, that country might endeavour
to regain Silesia also. When therefore Charles VII appealed
to Prussia for help, Frederick concluded a treaty with him
by which he promised to assist him in recovering the
kingdom of Bohemia, while the Emperor promised to cede
to Prussia the part of the kingdom situated on the right

An Historical Sketch 321

bank of the Elbe— a plan with which we here meet for the
first, but by no means for the last time in the annals of
Prussian politics. Frederick's action was as rapid as it always
was. Crossing through the territory of Saxony, that was now
allied with Austria, Frederick entered Bohemia on August
15, 1744, declaring that he appeared there to re-establish the
rule of the legitimate sovereign, Charles VII. He occupied
Prague after a short resistance and then marched into
Southern Bohemia, perhaps intending to menace Vienna.
The Austrian armies, that had been engaged in a campaign
against France, near the Rhine, were, however, now recalled,
and Frederick's position in Bohemia became a dangerous
one. He was also threatened in his rear by a Saxon army.
Frederic therefore determined to evacuate Prague and to
retire into Silesia through the North-eastern districts of
Bohemia. He successfully accomplished this difficult task,
not without the aid of the secretly Hussite peasants of
Bohemia, who sympathized with Prussia. The war between
Frederick the Great and the allied forces of Austria and
Saxony still continued for some time, but after Frederick's
victories at Hohenfriedberg and Kesselstadt a treaty of
peace was signed at Dresden on December 25, 1745. Its
contents were similar to those of the treaty of Berlin.
Prussia retained possession of the greatest part of Silesia
and of the county of Glatz.

Almost immediately after the treaty of peace, Maria
Theresa — who became Empress when her husband, Charles
of Lorraine, was, after the death of Charles VII, chosen as
Emperor — decided to reorganize and centralize the adminis-
tration of the states over which she ruled. To the great
autonomy and independence which some of these lands
still possessed, she largely attributed the troubles which had
marked the beginning of her reign. These constitutional
changes were, however, necessarily delayed by the outbreak
of the Seven Years' War.

Though the results of the Seven Years' War affected
Bohemia very little, as at its close the stipulations of the
Treaty of Berlin remained unchanged, yet as this war was,
particularly in the two first years, fought principally on
Bohemian soil, it cannot remain quite unmentioned here.
In 1756 Frederick the Great, having received information
that a large coalition of the European powers against him
was being formed, determined, with his habitual resolution

322 Bohemia

to anticipate his enemies. On August 26, 1756, the
Prussian army entered Saxony, where it met with no resist-
ance, as the Saxon army retired to a strongly fortified
position between Pirna and Konigstein. They here awaited
the arrival of their Austrian allies ; but Frederick, entering
Bohemia, defeated the Austrians at Lovosic, and then,
returning to Saxony, forced the Saxon army to capitulate.
In the following spring he again attacked Bohemia, and,
marching on its capital, won the fam.ed " Battle of Prague,"
which was really fought at the village of Sterbohol, five
miles from the city. The Austrians hastily retired to
Prague. Frederick besieged and bombarded the town, but
the Austrian victory at Kolin obliged him to raise the siege.
Frederick then marched westward to encounter the French
armies, and the Austrians availed themselves of his absence
to invade Silesia. Aided by the Roman Catholic part of
the population they obtained possession of a consider-
able part of the country, including Breslau. Frederick's
brilliant victory at Leuthen, on December 5, 1575, obliged
the Austrians again to evacuate Silesia. During the later
period of the Seven Years' War only outlying districts of
Bohemia were on rare occasions the scene of a war that
was mostly waged in Germany. The peace of Hubertsburg,
which in 1763 ended the war, confirmed the Prussian
conquest of Silesia and the county of Glatz.

The return of peace enabled the Empress Maria Theresa
to carry out the plans she had previously formed of re-
organizing the vast Habsburg dominions. Even during the
reign of Charles VI, the Empress's father, these various
racially and historically distinct countries were, to a great
extent, governed according to their ancient laws and tradi-
tions. Beside the high officials of Prague, no longer indeed
elected by the Estates, but appointed by ihe Austrian
Government, Bohemia was administered by the " Bohemian
secret court chancellery " (Boheimische Geheime Hof
Kanzlei). The financial affairs of the lands of the Bohe-
mian crown were under the direction of a council (Haupt
Commission derer drey Boheimischen Landen in cameral-
isticis). A supreme law-court (Obriste Justiz Stelle in
Bohemicis) was the highest tribunal for Bohemia, Moravia,
and Silesia.^ Though these three ministries, as we may call

^ After the signature of the Treaty of Berlin in 1742 the term
*« Silesia" of course only refers to those parts of the country — the

An Historical Sketch 323

them, all had their offices in Vienna, their sphere was
entirely limited to the Bohemian lands. Other officials
were charged with the administration of Flanders, Milan,
Hungary, Transylvania, and the so-called German hereditary
dominions of the House of Habsburg. This system of
government was undoubtedly a complicated one, but it was
certainly in accordance with the wishes of the majority of
the population of states between whom the dynasty formed
the only genuine connecting link. Maria Theresa, however,
as already mentioned, attributed the failures of the Austrian
armies at the beginning of her reign to the autonomy which
the Austrian Netherlands, Hungary, and to a limited extent
Bohemia also still possessed. The equipment of the armies
was, to a certain extent, still dependent on the grants of
money made by the different Estates. As the events during
the reign of Maria Theresa's son afterwards proved, it was
dangerous to encroach on the liberties of Hungary and of
the Netherlands. The councillors of Maria Theresa, there-
fore, determined first to devote their attention to Bohemia.
Of the Empress Maria Theresa it can be truly said that she
was the creator of what is now usually, though not officially,
called " Cisleithania," a term which describes the non-
Hungarian parts of the Habsburg domains. An imperial
decree in 1749 abolished the separate law courts of Bo-
hemia and Austria (/. e. the hereditary lands of the House of
Habsburg) and established at Vienna a central tribunal for
all the Bohemian and Austrian territories. Somewhat later
the administration of the two previously separate countries
was also united, and a common chancellor for Bohemia and
Austria was placed at its head. At Prague also the autho-
rity of the Estates was still further limited, and the custom
that the State officials, though appointed by the Government
of Vienna, were chosen among the Bohemians, fell into
desuetude. These administrative changes, which all tended
to place Bohemia in closer dependence on Vienna, con-
tinued with increasing energy during the reign of Maria
Theresa and her son Joseph, who in the year 1765 became
her co-regent. An important measure which imperilled
the national language even more than the decrees published
after the battle of the White Mountain, was the new system
of education which was introduced by Joseph II. He

Duchies of Jagerndorf, Teschen and Troppau — which continued to
belong to Austria.

324 Bohemia

founded a large number of new schools, in all of which —
even in the village schools of the lowest category — the
teaching was to be exclusively in the German language.
This decree, whose brutality is perhaps only equalled by
the recent Prussian school-regulations in Posen, deprived
the wretched Bohemian peasants even of the consolations
of religion ; for the religious instruction also was to be given
in German to children, few of whom knew any language but
their own. It should be stated to the honour of the
Bohemian priesthood that they, in those districts where
German was totally unknown, generally disregarded the
imperial decree. About the same time a new regulation
decreed that the German language should in future be
exclusively used in all, even the lowest law courts in the
Bohemian lands. The many Bohemians who, particularly
in country districts, had no knowledge of German, were
thus exposed to constant vexations and frauds.

While the new regulations of Maria Theresa had been
without exception injurious to Bohemia, the more extensive
and more far-reaching plans of her son Joseph II, who,
after her death in 1780 succeeded her as King of Bohemia
and Hungary, included some reforms that were very
favourable to Bohemia. Among these the most important
was the abolition of the system of serfdom, which still
oppressed the Bohemian peasants. This great reform was
carried out in the first year of Joseph's rule, who on this
occasion still acted in accordance with the Diet of Bohemia.
In the later years of his reign Joseph entirely suppressed
these meetings of the Estates. Though the peasantry of
Bohemia even now did not obtain complete freedom — this
was only granted them in 1848 — their state was greatly
improved by this reform.

Of Joseph's policy generally it can be said that it was
founded on the conception of " enlightened despotism "
which Frederick the Great's example had rendered fashion-
able among the sovereigns of the eighteenth century. He
determined to consolidate the wide and variegated lands
over which he ruled into one vast monarchy, whose only
language was to be the German one. The historical traditions
of Hungary and Bohemia Joseph treated with unconcealed
contempt. Thus he had planned to turn the time-honoured
palace of the Bohemian kings, on the Hradcany at Prague,
into barracks. Joseph was entirely free from the ultra-

An Historical Sketch 325

clerical tendency that has been so harmful to many princes
of his line. He proved this by issuing in 1781, the first
year in which he became sole ruler, the famed "decree
of tolerance " (Toleranz Patent). This decree granted full
freedom to the "Helvetic and Augsburg Confessions," a
description which included Lutherans and Calvinists. Ail
other Christian creeds, even the unity of the Bohemian
Brethren, which had in the last years before the battle of the
White Mountain almost become the national Church, were
excluded. Fearing that this unexpected amount of liberty,
granted so suddenly, might lead to disorders, very draconic
laws were issued against other "sectarians."^ Still the
" Toleranz Patent " was an enlightened measure for which
the people of Bohemia — many of whom had secretly re-
mained Protestants — were very grateful to their otherwise
unpopular ruler.

It was also in accordance with the traditional policy of
the enlightened despots of the eighteenth century that
Joseph II relaxed to a certain extent the extreme coercive
regulations which had hitherto rendered impossible in the
Habsburg dominions the appearance of any newspaper or
book that was not published — directly or indirectly — by
order of the Government. Thus Joseph allowed the publi-
cation in Prague of a paper in the national language, though
such a permission has, since his time, frequently been refused
by the Austrian ministers. It was only a consequence of
this comparative freedom that new editions of ancient
Bohemian works, and translations from foreign languages
into the national one now began to appear. It was also
during the reign of Joseph II that the Bohemian Society of
Sciences was founded, and professorships of the Bohemian
language were established at the university of Vienna, and
somewhat later at that of Prague. As the existence of
Bohemia as an autonomous country may be said to stand
and fall with that of the national language, the policy of
Joseph II — certainly very much against the wishes of its

^ We read that a sect sprang up in Bohemia calhng itself "deists,"
who appear to have been connected with free-masonry. Dr. Svatek, in
his Cultur Htstorische BUder, quotes a curious decree published against
these people. It states : " Should any man or woman declare themselves
to be 'deists,' they shall immediately and without previous cross-
examination receive twenty-four strokes witli a stick or birchrod, as a
warning, and then be sent back to their homes."

326

Bohemia

originator — prepared the way for the revival of the Bohemian
language in the following century.

The so-called reforms of Joseph II ended in a complete
failure. The population of the Austrian Netherlands rose
in arms against the Government, and that of Hungary was
on the point of doing so when, on the death of Joseph at
the beginning of the year 1790, his successor, Leopold II,
withdrew almost all the reforms of his brother. In Bohemia
also there had been great discontent, but the disunited
people was incapable of action. The nobles had become
mere courtiers, the citizens were powerless and servile, and
the peasants, of all Joseph's reforms, were interested only in
the agricultural measures, that had undoubtedly improved
their condition.

During his short reign Leopold II endeavoured to con-
ciliate the different nationalities whom the hasty and head-
long policy of his brother and predecessor had deeply
offended. Only a few weeks after the death of Joseph,
Leopold assembled the estates of Bohemia who during the
later years of the reign of Joseph had never been allowed to
meet. He also ordered the Bohemian crown, which by
order of Joseph had been transported to Vienna, to be
restored to Prague, and he was crowned with it at St. Vitus's
Cathedral on September 6, 1791. Leopold II died after a
reign of only two years.

The earlier part of the reign of his son and successor
Francis I, which concludes the period from 1792-1815, was
almost entirely absorbed by the prolonged and obstinate
contest of the house of Habsburg with revolutionary France.
In consequence of this struggle Francis became, and con-
tinued during his long life, a bitter enemy of all liberal and
progressive ideas, and indeed of all changes. He was at
the beginning of his reign crowned at Prague as King of
Bohemia, and received a deputation of the Estates, who
begged that a small part of the former autonomy should be
restored to their country. The Emperor, who was during his
whole life influenced by his dread of the French revolution,
replied by a decree which merely stated that all administra-
tive changes in Bohemia must be postponed till the termin-
ation of the foreign wars. The almost uninterrupted series
of wars with France was with few exceptions ^ waged outside

^ In 1 81 3 a French army under Marshal Vandamme crossed the

An Historical Sketch 327

of the frontiers of Bohemia. The country which gave to the
empire its best and most numerous soldiers none the less
suffered grievously, and the hopeless state of the Austrian
finances caused the complete ruin of a considerable part of
the population of Bohemia.

During the whole revolutionary period absolute internal
tranquillity prevailed in Bohemia, as in other parts of the
Habsburg empire. The reactionary ministers of other
countries regarded with envy the conditions of these coun-
tries where all expressions of liberal opinion could be entirely
and successfully suppressed. Austrian ministers also, as
Baron Helfert has well said,^ never even appear to have
taken into consideration the possibility that the desire for
liberal laws and institutions which showed itself so strongly
in neighbouring countries might finally manifest itself in a
very vehement manner in the Habsburg dominions also.
Two important constitutional changes in Bohemia belong
to this period. In 1804 Francis I assumed the hereditary
title of Emperor of Austria. It was however declared that
he would continue to bear the titles of King of Bohemia
and Hungary, and that his successors would as heretofore
continue to be crowned as kings of those countries. In 1 8 1 5
the Germanic confederacy began its inglorious career which
ended only in 1866. Not only the German hereditary lands
of the house of Habsburg, but also Bohemia with Moravia
and (Austrian) Silesia were included in this confederacy. It
was not considered necessary to submit this important con-
stitutional innovation to the Diet or meeting of the Estates
of Bohemia. There was indeed no danger that that body,
then entirely lacking independence and initiative, would ven-
ture to criticize, far less reject, any measure brought before
it by the government, but it was in accordance with the
policy then pursued at Vienna to suppress all semblance of
representative government.

The administration of the Habsburg dominions — with the
exception of Hungary — was founded on a system of severest f
absolutism during the years that followed the general pacifi- /
cation of 181 5. The liberty of the subject became entirely'
dependent on the arbitrariness of an omnipotent pohce. I
Countless government spies watched over even the most [

Bohemian frontier after the battle of Dresden. It was however defeated
at Kulm by the Russian and Austrian armies.

^ In his Geschichte der oesterreichischen Revolutiotty vol i. p. 5.

328 Bohemia

insignificant acts of the citizens. A double system of
"censure," one political, the other ecclesiastical,^ rendered
it impossible to express in print any opinions that were not in
strict accordance with the views of the government of
Vienna.

While the despotism of Vienna pressed heavily on all
parts of the empire, its oppression was felt more heavily in
Bohemia than elsewhere; for not only were individuals
deprived of all liberty, but the national language — so
sacred to all Bohemians — was excluded from every school,
law-court, or government office in the country. The fact
that in spite of all these and of other obstacles the first half
of the nineteenth century witnessed a revival of the Bohemian
language is an almost unique one. This event is mainly
due to a small group of literary men of whom Jungmann,
Kolar, Safafik, and Palacky^ were the most prominent.
They obtained the support of the more enlightened members
of the Bohemian nobility. As the Austrian police had at
that time the power of expelling from any town those who
were not either resident there or able to prove that they had
sufficient means of livelihood, the patriots who were poor,
and some of whom had come to Prague from other parts of
the empire, were exposed to constant persecution on the
part of the police. Several patriotic noblemen assured the
safety of the young enthusiasts by conferring on them
appointments as librarians or tutors in their families.
Palacky himself v^as appointed "historiographer to the
Estates of Bohemia," an appointment to which the govern-
ment of Vienna after much delay at last gave a reluctant
consent. The development of the national language was
greatly furthered by the foundation in 181 8 of the "Society
of the Bohemian Museum," In this museum many ancient
monuments of the period of Bohemia's greatness were
collected. Many historical MSS. of great value also found
a place in it and were afterwards printed by the Matice ^
Ceski, a society founded in connection with the museum.
The foundation of the museum was mainly due to the
efforts of Counts Sternberg and Kolovrat, the latter of whom

* For a short account of the Austrian system of " censure " see my
History of Bohemian LiteratJire, particularly p. 396-397 (2nd ed.).

2 For'a brief account of the career of these four men see chapter VII
of mv History of Bohemian Literature.

* In Bohemian, "treasury."

An Historical Sketch 329

held high office in the government of Vienna and was
therefore able to overcome the resistance which that
government always opposed to all Bohemian enterprise.
Many Bohemian nobles of the Klebelsberg, Kinsky, Cernin,
Thun, Liitzow, Waldstein, Wratislaw families immediately
joined the new association. The acquaintance with the
ancient history of their country contributed largely to revive
the patriotism of the people. Many ancient songs were re-
discovered, and — as happens so easily in a musical country —
new ones treating of the old and glorious time of Bohemia
were improvised and were soon in the mouths of all.

It is not my purpose to repeat here what I have previously
written on the revival of the Bohemian language and
literature. One point, however, deserves notice. The
Germans were at that time free from that racial hatred of
the Slav which has lately been so prominent. The great^
Gothe became a member of the Society of the Bohemian j
Museum. German poets rivalled the Bohemians themselves '
in celebrating the ancient glories of the nation.^ It may,
however, be suggested that this fairness was founded on the
supposition that Bohemia, as a political individuality, was
dead for ever ; the fact is none the less noteworthy.

About the year 1840 we perceive the beginning of a
political activity in Bohemia. It appeared at first only
among the Estates, as indeed there only a semblance of
independence still existed. After the end of the Napoleonic

1 Thus the poet Meissner, a German who resided in Bohemia,
describes the Bohemians of the Hussite time in these words :
** Ja eines grossen Volcks ! Du fremdes Blut
Du kannst es freilich nicht in Liedern lesen
Wie gross dies Volck in alter Zeit, wie gut
Wie martyrheilig es im Tod gewesen
Kein Dichterherz hat solchen hohen Tag
Dass kund er's thate ganz, wie du gelitten
Wie du da rings die Welt im Schlummer lag
^_ Hochherz'ges Bohmen fiir cias Licht gestritten.
Das weiss nur der den diese Flur gebar
Der diese heil'ge Schc>lle friih getreten ..."
Lenau, a German poet of Hungarian origin, describing the Hussites
as early fighters for freedom writes :

' ' Denn es wird in spaten Tagen
Unseren Leid und Kampfgenossen
Starkend aus Hussitengrabern
Trost und grtiner Muth entspiossen."
It would be easy to quote many other examples.

330 Bohemia

wars the Diets or meetings of the Estates again took place.
These meetings had however become a mere formality.
The governor (" high burgrave ") stated what sums the
government required and these were immediately and
unanimously voted without debate. It had become
proverbial to describe a dull party as having been " as quiet
as a meeting of the Estates."^ When the Emperor Ferdinand
in 1835 succeeded his father Francis the meetings of the
Diet took place somewhat more frequently, and were after a
time less insignificant. An unimportant circumstance pro-
duced the first note of opposition. In 1845 Count Chotek,
then governor, disposed of a house at Prague, the property
of the Estates, without waiting for the mere formality of asking
their consent. Count Frederick Deym, a strong nationalist
who had begun to be known as the " Bohemian O'Connell,"
strongly protested against this arbitrary act. Count
Chotek was recalled mainly through the influence of Count
Kolovrat who, himself a Bohemian, sympathised with the
Bohemians as far as his official position as Austrian minister
permitted. Henceforth, however, the claim of the Bohemian
Estates to exercise some control over the finances of their
country became ever more pressing. At the meeting of the
Diet in 1845 Count Frederick Deym proposed "that the
Estates should appoint a committee which was to determine
in what efficient but respectful manner they could defend
their menaced rights and privileges." In 1847 the Diet
again met. The committee mentioned above had drawn up
a statement declaring that the constitution of 1627 had still
left the Estates considerable powers. They still, it was
maintained, had the right of electing their king should the
Habsburg dynasty become extinct both in the male and
female line. The document further asserted the exclusive
right of the Estates to levy taxes in Bohemia, and declared
that if the Estates voted no taxes, none could be raised in
the kingdom of Bohemia. This document gave rise to a
very animated debate that lasted from the 3rd to the nth of
May. The hall at the Hradcany castle in which the meet-
ings of the Estates took place had by no means its usual
somnolent appearance. Some of the members ventured to
defend the absolutist policy of the government of Vienna.
Among them was Joseph Miiller, mayor (starosta) of Prague,
who, according to the then existing regulations, was a
^ Baron Helfert Die oesterreichische Revolution.

An Historical Sketch 331

nominee of the government of Vienna. Count Bouquoi
interrupted him by saying : " You are servile by your origin,
servile by your education, servile by your official position ;
nothing else could be expected of you." This occurrence
undoubtedly constitutes one of history's little ironies ; for
at the present time the liberal papers of Bohemia — perhaps
generalizing rather unfairly — accuse the nobility of servility,
while the present mayor of Prague is a strong upholder of
the autonomy and nationality of Bohemia. The declaration
proposed by the committee was finally voted by a large
majority, and the members of the Diet before separating
resolved that at their next meeting — which would, it was
supposed, take place in 1848 — they would petition the
Austrian government to consent to the increase of the
number of town-representatives at the Diets, to grant the
Estates full control over the road-making in the kingdom,
and to allow the introduction of the national language in
the schools. In consequence of the events of 1848 this
meeting of the estates never took place. — '

The beginning of the year 1848 was in Bohemia, as in
almost all continental Europe, marked by a revolutionary
outbreak. After the total failure of this movement it,
particularly in Bohemia, for a long time became fashionable
to overwhelm the idealistic and unpractical reformers with
a torrent of virulent abuse and cheap derision. Now that
the events of the " year of revolution " have risen from the
level of contemporary controversy to the calm heights of
history, the judgment of many will probably be different ;
they will think that these strivers who heedless of all diffi-
culties and dangers attempted to establish " government of
the people, by the people, for the people " undertook no
ignoble task.

It has already been mentioned that since the year 1840,
the formerly somnolent Estates had shown some tendency to
opposition. This attitude at first but slightly interested the
Bohemian people. The aloofness which to a great extent
separates the Bohemian nobility from the other classes of
the population caused the citizens — very unjustly, it must
be admitted — to believe that the nobles were only
endeavouring to obtain for themselves further favours from
the government of Vienna. It was only the talented young
journalist, Charles Havlicek (or " Havel Borovsky ") who
drew the attention of the pubUc to the attitude of opposition

332 Bohemia

taken up by members of that class which had been con-
sidered unconditionally devoted to the government of
Vienna. Havlicek's paper, the " Prazsk^ Noviny " ( " news
of Prague ") attacked the Austrian Government with great
ingenuity. As the " censor-office " prohibited all allusions
to the internal affairs of Bohemia, Havlicek published in the
form of reports on the condition of Ireland sharp criticism
on the government of his own country. Thus originated
the comparison between Ireland and Bohemia which has
since become one of the commonplaces of political con-
troversy.

It was also with reference to Ireland that a patrotic
association in Bohemia, formed shortly before the year 1 848,
assumed the name of " repeal." Sometime before the
beginning of the year 1848, the impressionable Bohemians
believed that that year would be of great importance to
their country. It was pointed out that in that year occurred
the fifth centenary anniversary of the foundation of the
university and of the "new town" of Prague. Even the
fact that the spring of that year was an early and very fine
one was interpreted in a mystical manner. The actual
outbreak of the liberal movement in Prague, as elsewhere,
only occurred when the news of the revolution in Paris
arrived. The news reached Prague on February 29, and on
March 11, a large popular meeting in the hall of the
so-called " baths of St. Venceslas " took place under the
direction of the " repeal " society. It was presided over by
Dr. Aloysius Trojan, afterwards a well-known member of the
parliaments of Prague and Vienna. The assembly resolved
to elect a committee comprising members of all classes of
the population, who were to present to the Emperor the
demands of the Bohemian people. These were formulated
in fourteen articles. The principal requests were that the
national language be granted complete equality with
German, that the detestable system of " censure " be
abolished, that Moravia and (Austrian) Silesia be again
joined to Bohemia as being lands of the Bohemian crown,
and that a thorough reform of the land-laws should alleviate
the distress of the Bohemian peasantry. The first deputa-
tion which presented these demands in Vienna obtained no
result, as the court was then entirely absorbed by the revo-
lutionary movement that had just broken out in Vienna. A
second deputation which proceeded there somewhat later was

An Historical Sketch 333

more successful. It brought back the Emperor's answer in
the shape of a letter addressed by him to Baron Pillersdorf,
then head of the Austrian government.^ It was stated in
this important document that the Emperor would shortly
convoke a Bohemian Diet in which not only the nobility and
clergy but also the towns and country districts would be
adequately represented. The Emperor would grant this
assembly full legislative power. He further promised that
the Bohemian language should in future enjoy complete
equality with the German one, and that the demands of the
Bohemians with regard to freedom of the press and personal
liberty would be granted. The claim of the landowners to
demand forced labour ("robota") from the peasants on
their estates was abolished and the landowners were to
receive an indemnity. The right of lower jurisdiction
possessed by the owners of certain large estates (velkostatky)
that could then only be held by nobles was abolished.
With regard to the reunion of Moravia and Silesia to
Bohemia, the matter was to be left to the decision of a
general assembly of representatives of all parts of the
Habsburg dominions. This Imperial decree was enthusi-
astically received at Prague, and the elections to the new
Diet, which would practically have had the character of a
constituent assembly, took place shortly afterwards. This
Bohemian parliament, however, never met.

The events in Bohemia are at this moment so closely con-
nected with those in Germany that it is necessary to refer
briefly to the condition of Germany at the beginning of the
year 1848. The only link between the numerous German
states had hitherto consisted in a meeting of representatives
of all the states which formed part of the confederacy. This
assembly which met at Frankfurt under the presidency of
Austria had long become intensely unpopular. All Germans
complained that no work, except the occasional passing of
reactionary measures, was done by the worthy diplomatists,
who met at Frankfurt. In consequence of the revolutionary
movement of the year 1848, the German Governments
found themselves obliged to give their reluctant consent to
the meeting of a national parliament at Frankfurt, at which
all countries forming part of the Germanic confederacy —

^ This document, dated April 8, 1848, which is of great importance
for the constitutional development of Bohemia, is printed by Kalousek,
p. 640-642.

334 Bohemia

therefore Bohemia also — were to be represented. Before
this parliament met it was settled that fifty prominent men,
belonging to all parts of Germany should meet to deliberate
on the organization of the new parliamentary assembly. It
was agreed that six of these men should be chosen among
the subjects of the house of Habsburg, and the historian
Palacky was invited to take part in the deliberations as one of
their number. Palack)^, on April 1 1, replied to this proposal
in a letter that remained, and indeed still is, famous in
Bohemia. He wrote : " I am not a German but a
Bohemian, belonging to the Slav race. Whatever talent I
may possess is at the service of my own country. My
nation is certainly a small one, but it has always main-
tained its historical individuality. The rulers of Bohemia
have often been on terms of intimacy with the German
princes, but the Bohemian people have never considered
themselves as Germans." These eloquent words of Palacky,
who now became, and continued to the end of his life, the
leader of the Bohemian people, found a general echo in the
country. Only a few representatives of Germanized districts
of Bohemia took part in the deliberations of the German
parliament at Frankfurt.

The meeting of this assembly was, however, one of the
causes of an event that had a large and disastrous influence
on the future of Bohemia. I refer to the Slavic congress at
Prague. The fact that Germans from all parts of their
country had, though they were subjects of various rulers,
met in one large assembly naturally suggested to the Slavs
of Austria, and particularly of Bohemia, the idea of meeting
in one great assembly. The men who undertook to
organize this assembly were by no means enemies of the
Habsburg dynasty. The fact that numerous members of
the Bohemian nobility, which since the time of Maria
Theresa has been traditionally loyal, took part in the pro-
ceedings bears sufficient witness to this. On April 30, a
considerable number of Slavic politicians — here also follow-
ing the example of Germany — met at a preliminary conference
to discuss the conditions under which a Slavic congress could
be held. It was decided to invite representatives of all the
Slavs who were under the rule of the house of Habsburg,
but to admit as guests all who belonged to the Slavic race.

The plan of the Slavic leaders placed the government
of Vienna in a very difficult position. The Hungarian

An Historical Sketch 335

government which was at that moment, as in the present
day, almost independent of Vienna, raised an energetic
protest against the meeting of any assembly, at which
the Slavs of Hungary should be represented. The
attitude of the German and liberal cabinet which had
taken office in Vienna in March was one of hatred and
fear of the Hungarians, of hatred and contempt of the
Slavs. The cabinet of Vienna was, however, entirely power-
less, as several government officials and generals, of whom
Prince Windischgratz — who at this moment became com-
mander of the Imperial forces in Bohemia — was the
most important, had already planned a return to the
former absolutist system of government. In spite of
the dangers that threatened them, the Bohemian patriots
determined to hold their congress. About the end of
May numerous Slavs from all countries began to arrive
at Prague. The principal leaders met at the house of
Baron Neuberg, an ardent patriot, on May 27 and 28.^
The meeting had by no means a revolutionary character.
Count Leo Thun, who was at that moment at the head of
the government (Zemsk)^ president) acted as chairman.
Most of the Bohemian patriots were present as well as
several Servian guests, among whom was General Zach,
who afterwards became known as leader of the Servian
armies. On May 30 numerous other patriots arrived
from the country districts of Bohemia, from Croatia,
Servia, Poland, Moravia, and the Slavic parts of Hun-
gary. They were received with great enthusiasm by the
National Guard, which in Prague, as in most continental
cities, had been formed in the revolutionary year. At a
meeting which took place at the National Museum ^ on
June I, Palack)^ was elected president of the congress,
and on the following day, after a solemn mass at the Tyn
church, the first general assembly took place on the
Sophia island. From the first moment, however, dark
clouds, as Tomek writes, appeared on the horizon.
Though the Russian Government had forbidden* its

^ Tomek Pamety zroku 1848 (Memoirs of the year 1848). Professor
Tomek took a considerable part in the events at Prague in 184S.

2 The large building which now contains the collections of the
National Museum had not then been erected ; they were then
housed in a building on the Phkop, the principal street of Prague.
•See my Prague.

336

Bohemia

subjects to attend the congress, several Russian revolu-
tionists of a very advanced school were present. Here,
as so often before and since that time, the extremists
proved the worst enemies of liberty's true friends. On
the other hand, the attitude of the troops at Prague was
a menacing one from the beginning of the congress.
On June 5, Prince Windischgratz, commander of the
garrison of Prague, held a great review. The soldiers, all
alien to Bohemia, already professed an intense hatred of
the citizens and particularly of the students. It also
appears that here, as on so many occasions, the Austrian
Government employed the evil services of secret agents.^
Prince Windischgratz's political views were well known.
He had almost alone, when even Prince Matternich's
colleague Count Kolovrat declared the ancient chan-
cellor's demission necessary, expressed the wish that
Mettemich should retain office and that the garrison of
Vienna should immediately attack the people. The
reception of Windischgratz on the occasion of this review,
when he was greeted with enthusiasm by his soldiers,
had almost the character of a pronunciamento. On the
following day Windischgratz ordered to Prague the
garrisons of all the smaller towns of Bohemia. The
conflicts between the soldiers and the people daily
became more frequent.

The Slavic congress had meanwhile continued its
deliberations. Several committees had been elected
which were to report on the condition of the Slavs
in the different countries in which they reside. It had
also been determined under the influence of two agitators,
Bakunin, a Russian, and Libert, a Prussian Pole, to
publish a manifesto which, almost ignoring the national
question, expounded in the then customary phraseology
the theory of the sovereignty of the people. Palacky
and Tomek, firm upholders of the historical rights of
the Bohemian people, could not approve of this unprac-
tical and doctrinaire resolution. Wishing, however, to

^ In a work of this extent it is obviously impossible to discuss
adequately the causes of the riots at Prague in 1848. It appears
certain that the Austrian Government gave orders for a large number
of unifoims such as were then worn by the men of the National
Guard. There is unfortunately little doubt that they were intended
to be worn by agents of the secret police, who were to iixsult the
soldi rs and thus cause a conflict.

An Historical Sketch 337

avoid discord among the members of the congress, they
finally consented to its being passed. Palack)^ had
previously obtained the insertion of a passage which
laid stress on the equality of the Slavic races with the
Teutonic and I^tin ones that had so long oppressed
them.

June 1 1 was in that year Whitsunday. The Slavic con-
gress interrupted its sittings for a few days, and many
members left Prague for the country. The assertion after-
wards made by Government officials that a vast conspiracy
was planned at this moment is undoubtedly untrue. On
Whitmonday a solemn mass was said in St. Venceslas"s
place, where prayers were offered up for the success of the
congress. After the end of the service som^e of those who
had been present on their way home passed through the
Celetna ulice, where the palace of the military commander
was then situated. On passing the residence cries were
raised which the soldiers on duty there — who were all ignorant
of the Bohemian language — believed, or pretended to believe,
to be insults against their commander. The large force of
soldiers which was concentrated in the vast courtyard of the
palace immediately marched out into the street and began
to fire on the passers-by.^ A panic ensued, as a rumour
that Prince Windischgratz was planning forcibly to re-estab-
lish absolutism, had been widely circulated. Barricades
were hurriedly erected in various parts of the town, and de-
sultory fighting took place in several directions. Some houses
belonging to Bohemian patriots were plundered, and the
soldiers made an attempt to destroy the collections contained
in the National museum. There was no organized resistance
to the troops, as no revolution had been planned. Even the
students, who had slightly fortified the university buildings
known as the Clementinum, immediately released Count Leo
Thun, whom they had made a prisoner. As he had not
hitherto proved hostile to the national cause, it was hoped
that he would act as mediator. The thought of retaining a
hostage, so familiar to more recent and more ferocious
revolutionists, was never conceived by these youthful and
enthusiastic patriots.

When the news of the troubles at Prague reached Vienna
the Austrian Government immediately attempted to mediate.

^ I make this statement on the authority of men who were present in
the Celetna ulice when this event took place.

338

Bohemia

Composed as it then was of men of liberal views, it well
knew that Windischgratz's plans extended far beyond the
borders of Bohemia. Count Mensdorf was sent to Prague
as Imperial representative, and he was instructed to replace
Prince Windischgratz as commander of the troops in
Bohemia. Mensdorf entered into negotiations with the
national committee, and on June 15 it appeared that these
negotiations were proceeding favourably. The officers and
men of the garrison of Prague, however, refused to obey any
commander except AVindischgratz,^ and General Mensdorf
and the Government officials who accompanied him were
obliged hurriedly to leave Prague. Windischgratz had mean-
while withdrawn all his forces from the interior of the city
and concentrated them on the surrounding heights. Under
the pretext that shots had been fired at his outposts he be-
gan on June 16 a general bombardment of Prague. During
the night fires broke out in all directions, and on the follow-
ing morning the city capitulated unconditionally. Win-
dischgratz's plans had begun successfully. One of the
principal towns of the empire was again under absolutist
rule. The short-sighted and narrow-minded Germans of
Bohemia, and even of other countries, at first celebrated
Windischgratz as a national hero. It was only when the
general, with even greater energy, re-established autocracy in
Vienna also that their views underwent a change.

The bombardment of Prague marks in Bohemia the end
of the national and liberal movement of the year 1848,
though Bohemian representatives, as will be mentioned
presently, took part in the deliberations of the Austrian
constituent assembly that met at Vienna, and afterwards at
Kromerize. In Bohemia, however, absolutism was already
triumphant. Shortly before the outbreak of the disturbances
at Prague the national committee, which since the meeting
in the hall of St. Venceslas directed the national movement,
sent two of its members. Dr. Rieger and Count Nostitz, to
Innsbruck, where the Imperial court was then residing.
They arrived at Prague on their return at the moment when
General Mensdorf was vainly attempting to obtain a cessation
of hostilities. Rieger and Nostitz were bearers of good news.
The Emperor had received them graciously and had con-
firmed all the promises contained in his letter of April 8. He

1 The *' inspired " reports on these events suppress all mention of this
somewhat prsetorian attitude of the troops in Bohemia.

An Historical Sketch 339

had also promised to convoke the Bohemian Parliament in
the course of the month of June, leaving it to Count Leo
Thun, as representative of the Austrian Government in
Bohemia, to fix the day.

All the hopes of Bohemia were destroyed by the action
of Prince Windischgratz. The members of the Slavic con-
gress immediately dispersed ; the meeting of the Bohemian
Parliament was indefinitely postponed and, indeed, never
took place ; the national committee was dissolved ; Prague
and most of the Bohemian towns were placed in a state
of siege. At the end of the year 1848 Prague was for a
short time freed from this state, but it was re-established a
few months later, as the police spies again maintained that
they had discovered a vast conspiracy in Bohemia. It
appears that the fact that a few students had incautiously
spoken with disapproval of the Government was the only
foundation of this denunciation. The courts-martial re-
sumed their activity, which became even greater than before.
As constitutional government had not yet been formally
abolished, the military and police officials considered it
their duty to prove the existence of far-reaching conspiracies,
which justified the maintenance of martial law. For this
purpose they used means not differing widely from the
customs of the middle ages.^

The liberty of the press, after a brief spell of freedom
again disappeared. In Prague almost all the papers except
the organ of the Government discontinued publication.
The editors who were sufficiently venturesome not to do so
were subject to bitter and persistent persecution. Even
the tamest criticism of Government measures rendered the
writer and the editor liable to fines and imprisonment. As
the reactionary movement was directed in Bohemia by men
whose sympathies were entirely German, the papers written
in the national language were treated far worse than the Ger-
man ones, and they soon disappeared altogether, while some
German papers continued to be published during the whole
period of absolutism. Among the Bohemian journalists

^ The regulations of the courts-martial authorized the presidents of
such courts, should they think that a witness obstinately refused to give
evidence or attempted to mislead the authorities, to have corporal
punishment inflicted on such a person. It was in the case of grown
men to consist of not more than fifty strokes with a stick, in the case of
youths and women of not more than thirty strokes with a birch-rod.

340 Bohemia

who were at this period persecuted by the Austrian Govern-
ment the most illustrious was Charles Havli^ek, whose
memory is still revered by the Bohemians. He had, as
already mentioned, begun before the year 1848 to edit
the Prazskc Noviny. When the liberal movement of that
year began Havlicek broke off his connection with it, thinking
that its proprietors did not allow him sufficient indepen-
dence. He founded a new paper entitled the Ndrodni
Noviny (National News), and very courageously continued
its publication even after the bombardment of Prague. The
paper was constantly confiscated, sometimes entirely sup-
pressed for a few months, then again for a short time
permitted to appear.^ Havlicek finally saw the impossibility
of publishing in Prague a paper opposed to the Government.
He therefore, in spite of the difficulties raised by the
authorities, and contrary even to the advice of some of his
friends, determined to found a new paper at Kutna Hora,
a town in which the state of siege had not been pro-
claimed. The first number of the new paper, to which
Havlicek gave the name of Slovan (the " Slav ") appeared
on May 8, 1850. In his new paper he continued
bravely to uphold the political and national demands of his
countrymen. The reactionary movement in the Habsburg
monarchy was by this time fully successful, and the persecu-
tion of Havlicek continued relentlessly; almost every
number of his paper was confiscated, and in those very
numerous parts of the empire which were under martial
law its sale was entirely prohibited. Though Havlicek, a
poor man, suffered financially also, he courageously continued
the unequal struggle up to August 15, 1851, when the last
number of the Slovan appeared. Havlicek now determined
entirely to leave political life and to seek to gain a living by
farming. His sufferings were not, however, at an end. In
consequence of an article contained in the last number of
the Slovan, the public prosecutor brought an accusation
against Havlicek before the law-court of Kutna Hora.
Trials by jury had, in that part of Bohemia which was not
under martial law, not yet been suppressed ; its suppression
was, indeed, one of the consequences of the trial of Havlicek.
He appeared, on November 17, before the jury of Kutna
Hora and was unanimously acquitted. His heroic attitude
and his eloquence are still remembered by the Bohemian

^ k'arel Havlicek Borovshy , by Adolph Si b.

An Historical Sketch 341

people. The Austrian Government was, however, now more
firmly determined than ever to silence Havlicek. The
coup-d'Hat of Napoleon III had encouraged the friends of
absolutism in all parts of the continent. By order of the
minister, Baron Bach, who was just beginning to acquire
that influence which for a time made him almost omnipotent
in Austria, Havlicek was arrested at three o'clock of night on
December i6, 1851, and conveyed to Brixen in the Tyrol.
He was interned here and remained here for some years
under the strict supervision of the police. He was only
permitted to return to his native land when his health was
already failing, and he died shortly after his return to
Bohemia.

The persecution of Bohemian patriots was not limited to
men who like Havlic^ek openly expressed views that were in
Austria considered radical. Even so conservative a states-
man as was Palack/ suffered from the molestation of the
Austrian Government and the secret police. He had long
been president of the society of the National Museum, but
when new elections took place during the period of renewed
absolutism the committee did not even dare to elect him one
of its members. Yet even this cautious association of noble-
men and scholars incurred the suspicion of Bach's agents, and
it was decreed that a commissioner of the police should be
present at the sittings of the association. Palacky, whose
great historical work had largely contributed to the revival
of the national feeling in Bohemia, incurred the special
hatred of the military rulers of Prague. The suggestion of
trying him by court-martial was seriously discussed, but the
plan was afterwards abandoned. Yet he continued under
constant and secret supervision by the police. Palackj^ has
himself told us that at this period he avoided walking
through the more frequented streets of Prague. He did not
wish to place his friends before the alternative of either
ignoring him or incurring the disfavour of the police by
being seen in his company. All relations between Palack}^
and the Bohemian nobility, who had so highly esteemed
him, ceased for a time. The nobles, with few exceptions,
temporarily withdrew their support from the national cause.
It was only in i860, when a new attempt was made to
establish constitutional government in Bohemia that this
ceased to be the case.

It has already been mentioned that Bohemian representa-
M 2

342 Bohemia

tives took part in the deliberations of the Austrian parliament
that met at Vienna in 1 848. They have often been blamed
for having done so. Yet it must be remembered that as all
liberty had already been suppressed in their own country,
the Vienna parliament was the only forum in which they
could freely express their views. It should also be noted
that the Vienna parliament was a constituent assembly, and
the Bohemians could therefore take part in its deliberations
without prejudging the question of their autonomy concern-
ing which they had recently received such satisfactory
promises from the court.

It has already been mentioned that the Bohemian
national movement was at its beginning mainly a literary
one. It is therefore natural that there should have been
many scholars and men of letters among the deputies whom
the Bohemians returned to the parliament of Vienna. We
find among them the names of Palacky — who was elected
by several constituencies, and became the leader of the
party — Tomek the great historian, Havlicek, Trojan, and
Rieger, who now first gave proofs of his great eloquence.
The learned Safafik, who was also elected, declined to
proceed to Vienna. The position of the Bohemian delegates
in Vienna was from the first a very difficult, indeed an
almost helpless one. The radical majority was thoroughly
imbued with the extreme and nebulous views of the German
democracy of the year 1848. Their hatred of the Slavic
" inferior " race was as great as that with which they viewed
all authority and orderly government. An alliance with
such men was impossible. The conservative party consisted
largely of clericals from the Tyrol and Galicia ; the latter,
mostly ignorant of the German language, voting according to
a signal given by their leader. The short residence of the
Bohemians in Vienna was not a pleasant one. They
arrived there early in July and on the i8th Rieger was
attacked by the mob in the " Graben," the principal street of
Vienna. Through the intervention of some German radical
deputies he was able to escape with his life. The terrorism
of the populace of Vienna increased daily, and the Bohemian
delegates decided to leave the city. On October 6, Rieger,
whose life had again been menaced by German workmen,
succeeded in escaping from Vienna together with his friend
Havlicek. Shortly afterwards Prince Windischgratz and his
army arrived before Vienna. On October 26 the bombard-

An Historical Sketch 343

ment of the city began, and it surrendered unconditionally
on the 31st.

There cannot at the present time be much doubt that at
this moment when two of the largest cities in the empire
were subjected to the state of siege, and the attempt of the
Italians to secure their independence had failed, the
reactionary councillors of the court had already determined
to re-establish absolutism in a new and — as events proved —
even more vexatious form. Why it was thought advisable
to keep up for a time the pretence of continuing parlia-
mentary government will only be known when future
historians obtain access to the now hermetically secluded
state papers of this period. The new reactionary ministers
in Vienna decided that the parliament should continue its
deliberations, but that it should be transferred to the small
town of Kromefize in Moravia. The deputies met there
for the first time on November 22, and the Bohemians again
took part in the deliberations. The assembly, in a spirit
that may be called foolish or heroic, and perhaps was both,
proceeded to discuss the fundamental rights of the citizens.
Very radical but absolutely Utopian measures were passed.
At a moment when the prime minister. Prince Schwarzenberg,
and the commander-in-chief, Prince Windischgratz, were
openly expressing views that to a courtier of Louis XIV
would have appeared somewhat extreme, the assembly at
Kromefize voted the suppression of hereditary nobility.
Very liberal enactments defining the limits of the powers of
the Church and of the State were also voted. Rieger, whose
eloquence had already rendered him conspicuous, spoke
strongly and brilliantly in favour of religious liberty — a fact
that was often recalled when Rieger later in Hfe expressed
somewhat ultramontane views. When Prince Schwarzenberg
— as events proved somewhat prematurely — believed that
the war with Hungary was successfully terminated, he
advised the Emperor Francis Joseph — who on December 2,
1848, had suceeded to his uncle Ferdinand — to dissolve the
parliament of .Kromefize. This was done quite suddenly
on March 4, 1849, and when the members on that day
arrived at the building where they met, they found it closed
and all the entrances guarded by a large force of police and
soldiers. The police immediately afterwards issued warrants
against many deputies whose immunity now ended. Some,
though the dissolution had been purposely kept secret,

344 Bohemia

received a timely warning and escaped to foreign countries.
The plan of trying Palack}^ by court-martial was — as already
mentioned — soon given up. Rieger for a short time
retired to Paris, but was soon allowed to return to his native
country. The proceedings taken against Havlicek have
already been mentioned. Though the assembly at Krom-
efize had thus been unceremoniously dismissed, the pretence
of establishing representative institutions was still kept up.
In March 1849, a new constitution for the whole empire,
including Hungary, was established. It requires no notice,
as no attempt was ever made to carry out its provisions.
It was formally suppressed on December 31, 185 1, and
undisguised absolutism prevailed in all parts of the Habsburg
dominions up to the year i860.

An autocratic government such as was now established
required the support of military prestige. After the disas-
trous campaign in Lombardy in 1859, the government of
Vienna determined to make a new attempt to establish
representative institutions. After some preUminary delibera-
tions the Imperial councillors devised a constitutional
scheme, which, had it been fairly and impartially carried
out, would probably have assured permanent concord and
harmony to the vast empire. It was proposed that a central
parliament, composed of delegates of all the states which
form the empire, should meet to deliberate on a strictly
limited number of subjects. The members of this assembly
were to be elected by the parliamentary bodies which
represented the different states of the empire. To these
bodies very extensive powers were granted. In Hungary,
and to a lesser degree in Bohemia, their constitution was
modelled on that of the ancient Diets of those states.

These reforms were contained in a decree dated October
20, i860. Its author, Count Goluchowski,^ declared it to
be henceforth the fundamental law of the country. It was
well received in Bohemia, but met with bitter hostility on
the part of the Hungarians. Even the most conservative
statesmen of that country — and they alone then took part
in the councils of the empire — declared that Hungary was
still deprived of her ancient rights. Yet louder was the
outcry of the foolish and frivolous population of Vienna.
The Viennese, greatly to the damage of the empire, have

^ Father of the Count Goluchowski, who was recently Austrian
minister of Foreign Affairs.

An Historical Sketch 345

always founded on the fact that their city is the Imperial
residence, a claim of supremacy for the German race to
which they belong.

These evil influences prevailed. Count Goluchowski
retired from office and was replaced by Baron Schmerling,
an Austrian bureaucrat of the ancient school. Baron
Schmerling believed, as most men of his class did, and
still do, that a strong central administration directed from
Vienna by German officials was the form of government
most suitable to the polyglot state. Strongly German in
his sympathies, he also in view of the foreign policy of the
empire considered it necessary that its subjects should, at
least to the foreign observer, appear as Germans ; thus only
could the Austrian hegemony in Germany, which was
represented by the presidency of the federal council at
Frankfurt, be preserved. A certain amount of constitutional
government Schmerling, after 'the disasters in Lombardy,
considered a necessary evil. As the result of these con-
siderations Schmerling published the decree of February 26,
185 1, many of whose enactments are still in force. A
central parliament, representing the whole empire and
consisting of two houses, was to meet at Vienna. The
different parts of the empire were granted representative
bodies, to whom very limited powers were assigned,
though they were entitled to choose from their number the
members of the central parliament. Faithful to his system
of maintaining and even extending the influence of the
German element, Schmerling established a system of
election which — particularly in Bohemia — was outrageously
unfair. Some of the deputies of the Bohemian country
districts represented 2500, others 25000 electors ; and it was
always the German deputy who represented the smaller and
the Bohemian who represented the larger number of
votes. There is in all the records of parliamentary repre-
sentation no worse case of gerrymandering than that which
we find in Schmerling's electoral law for Bohemia.

When the Bohemian Diet met at Prague in 1861 the
assembly consisting almost entirely of Germans appeared
rather as a travesty than as a representation of the opinions
of the nation. One of the first duties of the Bohemian Diet
was to elect representatives to the central parliament at
Vienna. The nationalist members took part in this election
— an action for which they have been frequently blamed.

346

Bohemia

It has often been stated that they should — following the
example of the Hungarians — have refused to be represented
in Vienna. Yet their position was quite different from
that of the Hungarians. In consequence of the arbitrary
electoral ordinances of Schmerling, the government would
easily have replaced the nationalists by German Bohemians,
who would in Vienna have been recognized as representa-
tives not of a German minority but of the whole Bohemian
nation. It was, however, soon found impossible by the
Bohemians to take part in the deliberations of the parlia-
ment of Vienna. Not only did frivolous sophists such as
Giscra, afterwards a Cisleithanian minister, grossly insult the
Bohemian crown and constitution, but the whole assembly
— openly encouraged by Schmerling himself — trenched on
matters which, as the Bohemians rightly believed, had
been reserved to the competency of the Bohemian Diet by
the decree of October 20, i860. Hungary, Croatia, and
Venetia — then still part of the Habsburg empire — had from
the first declined to take part in the deliberations of the
parliament of Vienna. Schmerling's policy proved a com-
plete failure. Though he long clung to office, he was
finally and somewhat unceremoniously dismissed on July
27, 1865.

Schmerling's successor was Count Louis Belcredi, a
statesman who has probably been more grossly misrepre-
sented than any other politician of the present day. Having
always been employed in the civil service — he was governor
of Bohemia when called to Vienna — he had little oppor-
tunity of studying the foreign policy of the empire. He had
gathered from members of the Austrian diplomatic service,
that a somewhat prolonged period of peace was probable.^
This was a necessity for him, as he intended to carry out a
complete system of re-organization of the empire — probably
somewhat on the lines of the decree of October.

It is beyond the purpose of this work to refer to the
causes which lead to the war between Austria and Prussia
in 1866. In the German parts of Austria the war was
joyfully welcomed — particularly by the citizens of Vienna
and the officials of the ''Ball Platz" (Foreign Office).

^ Belcredi afterwards expressed himself somewhat bitterly. He
writes in his memoirs : " Leider hat mich eine bittere Erfohrung
gelehrt, dass niemand schlechter informirt ist als die oesterreichische
Diplomatic."

An Historical Sketch 347

The Viennese declared that the Prussians could easily be
driven off with a wet rag,i and Prince Metternich,
Austrian ambassador in Paris, was busily occupied in
composing a "triumphal march" to celebrate the entry
of the Austrian troops into Berlin.

The Bohemian people did not view matters in the same
light. In a country where the study of history is perhaps
more general than in any other, no man underrated the
indomitable courage and the iron tenacity of the German
foes. The descendants of the Hussites, " men whose
fathers braved the world in arms " against Bohemia, knew
how dearly won and sanguinary some of the victories of
their ancestors over the Germans had been. The Bohemians
were now also prepared to defend their country. A short
time previously gymnastic societies had been formed in
most parts of Bohemia. The members of these societies
soon became known as the " sokols," from the falcon (in
Bohemian, sokol) feather which they wore in their caps.
These men were eager again to meet in the field the ancient
enemies of their nation. They begged to be allowed to
organize the national defence, and to occupy and fortify the
mountains and often narrow passes that lead from Prussia
and Saxony into Bohemia, and which they — rightly as events
proved — believed to have been left undefended. ^ A stern
refusal was the only answer. The Vienna Government, still
pursuing the foolish phantom of supremacy in Germany,
wished the war — as the official proclamation stated — to be
considered as a " war of Germans against Germans."

It is not my task to describe here the short campaign
w^hich, practically decided by the battle of Kralove Hradec
(July 3, 1866),^ was terminated by the peace of Prague on
August 23. Austria lost no territory to Prussia by this
treaty. The scheme of annexing the part of Bohemia
situated on the right bank of the Elbe was soon abandoned
by the Prussians. Prussia, however, obtained its principal
object. The dominions of the House of Habsburg were
entirely excluded from Germany ; the link that bound the
unwilling Bohemians to Germany was severed. During the

^ "Mit einem nassen Fetzen."

2 These facts have been told me by Professor Tilser, who was one of
the "sokols" of that time.

^ I have given a short account of the battle of Kralove Ilradec
(better known under the German name of Koniggratz) in the Pall Mall
Ma^azim for November 1904.

348

Bohemia

occupation of their country by the Prussians, the Bohemians,
who were defenceless and unarmed, maintained an attitude
of dignified reserve. The same cannot be said of the
German inhabitants of Bohemia. Very competent author-
ities state that they on several occasions welcomed the
Prussians with so much enthusiasm that it was only the
loyalty with which the King of Prussia, even in the time
of war, discouraged such manifestations that prevented their
leading to serious consequences.^

It is, as I have wTitten elsewhere, a bitter saying in
Austria that those nationalities which support the Govern-
ment suffer, and those that oppose it are rewarded. The
Hungarians had been on the verge of rebellion during the
campaign of 1866, and had even formed a free corps to
support the Prussians. The Bohemians, on the other hand,
had remained loyally and undauntedly faithful to the
dynasty. Yet in the year following the battle of Kralov^
Hradec, Hungary obtained almost complete independence,
while Bohemia's demand of autonomy was ignominiously
rejected.

Count Belcredi's plans received a death blow by the
Bohemian campaign. The councillors of Vienna deter-
mined to call in the assistance of Baron — afterwards Count
— Beust, who before the war had been prime minister of
Saxony. He claimed no knowledge of the internal politics
of the Habsburg empire. It is no longer a secret that his
mission consisted in organizing a new active policy in
Germany which might eventually reverse the results of the
battle of Kralove Hradec. Beust knew that Hungary had
been openly hostile to Austria during the war that had just
ended, and that Hungary would some years previously have
been lost to the empire, had not Russia interfered. In
1866 no such an intervention could be expected. Count
Beust also reflected that as Hungary had never formed part
of the Germanic confederation, its autonomy was by no
means an obstacle to the re-establishment of the Habsburg
hegemony in Germany.

The position of Bohemia was entirely different. On the
resignation of Count Belcredi (February 4, 1867) Count
Beust, who had hitherto only acted as minister of foreign
affairs, undertook also the direction of the internal policy

1 This is particularly mentioned by Duke Ernest of Saxe-Coburg in
his Aus memem Leben (vol iii. p. 600).

An Historical Sketch 349

of the Habsburg realm. He decided to re-establish in the
non-Hungarian part of the empire the so-called constitution
of Schmerling. The Bohemian Diet was therefore again
called on to elect delegates to the central Parliament of
Vienna. According to the electoral laws of Schmerling
every Government was, and indeed still is, certain of a
majority in the Diet of Prague. There was nothing left to
the national party but to record a protest. This was done
in a brilliant manner by Dr. Rieger in a speech pronounced
before the Diet of Prague on April 3, 1867. Addressing
the Germans who were to represent Bohemia in Vienna, he
said,^ " You are, gentlemen, going to Vienna in accordance
with your political views. We cannot prevent your doing
this, but remember what we have said to you here ; you are
not authorized to give up the historical rights of this king-
dom . . . Remember that, though you have the majority
here, you yet represent but the minority of the population
of the kingdom, and we the majority ... In the estab-
lishment of a Cisleithanian and of a Hungarian Parliament,
I clearly see an attempt to subjugate the Slavic nations in
both parts of the empire. Over one division the Germans,
over the other the Magyars are to rule. We think such a
partition of rights belonging to others cannot prevail, for
' justitia est regnorum fundamentum ! ' " After the end of this
speech the national deputies left the Diet of Prague as they
had already, in 1863, left the Parliament of Vienna.

On August 22 the national deputies published a docu-
ment which became known as the " declaration." They here
declared that even Ferdinand II, after the battle of the
White Mountain, had recognized part of the ancient privi-
leges of Bohemia, and that the new representative institu-
tions were directly opposed to them, and would never be
recognized by the Bohemian people.

The German cabinet established by Count Beust, after a
short time found it impossible to continue its system of
government. After the short ministry of Count Potocki,
Count Hohenwarth took office on February 7, 187 1.
Hohenwarth, a very distinguished statesman, immediately'
attempted to establish peace with Bohemia. By his advice
an Imperial decree was published on September 14, in
which the sovereign declared that " in consideration of the
former constitutional position of Bohemia, and remembering
* keci (Speeches), Dra F. L. Riegra, vol. iv. pp. 239-240.

350 Bohemia

the power and glory which its crown had given to his
ancestors, and the constant fidelity of the people, he gladly
recognized the rights of the kingdom, and was willing to
confirm this assurance by taking the coronation oath."
Hohenwarth's loyal attempt failed, mainly through
German influence, and in 1879 the Bohemians entered the
Parliament of Vienna. The events of the last thirty years
cannot yet be considered as belonging legitimately to the
domain of history. It may, however, be well to say a word
on the present condition of Bohemia. The prospect of the
country at this moment (October 1909) appears very dark.
This is mainly a consequence of the foreign policy of the
empire. Bohemia has always had so little influence on the
foreign policy of Austria that it is only in consequence of
the events of the last year that I may briefly allude to those
who have recently directed the foreign policy of the
empire. The recent ministers of foreign affairs of Austria
had been men of little importance. Count Kalnoky had
served for some time in the army and then pursued a
diplomatic career. He had retained the manner and
appearance of a soldier, a ''corporal," as he was often
called. Of limited capacity and almost devoid of education,
he endeavoured to impress his adversaries by a peremptory
manner, the result of which was that he was generally con-
sidered ill-bred. Of his successor, Count Goluchowski,
it is unnecessary to repeat here what I have previously
written.^

Count Aehrenthal, the present Austrian minister of foreign
affairs, is in every way superior to his predecessors. He is
perhaps one of the great statesmen of his time. Yet we
must leave it to the future to judge whether the annexation
of Bosnia and Hercegovina without the previous consent of
the signatories of the treaty of Berlin was judicious. In
Bohemia the measure was intensely unpopular. The people
— rightly, as events have proved — believed that the empire
would become yet more subservient to Germany. The
annexation not having been received as patiently as Count
Aehrenthal believed, Austria had to rely on Germany, and
with German help the annexation was safely carried out. It
would be attributing to Germans more generosity than they
claim, were we to doubt that their influence in Austria will
become yet greater. That influence is always used against
* In the Nineteenth Century, December 1899.

An Historical Sketch 351

Bohemia and in favour of the German minority of the
population of that country. The policy of the present
Austrian prime minister is more hostile to Bohemia than
that of any of his predecessors. Dark clouds seem to
surround the future of Bohemia.

PRINCES OF BOHEMIA

Pfemy

si

Kfesomysl

Nezamysl

Neklan

Mnata

Hostivit

Vojen

Borivoj I

Unislav I

Spytihnev I

Vratislav I.

Venceslas I

928-936

Bfetislav II

1092-1110

Boleslav I .

936-967

Borivoj II .

1110-1120

Boleslav II .

967-999

Vladislav I .

I I 20-1 125

Boleslav III

999-1002

Sobeslav I .

1125-1140

Vladivoj

I 002- I 003

Vladislav II (asl

Jaromir

, 1003-1012

King, I) . J

1140-1173

Ulrich

. 1012-1037

Sobeslav II .

1173-1189

Bfetislav I .

. 1037-1055

Conrad Otho

1189-1191

Spytihnev II

. 1055-1061

Venceslas II

1191-1192

VratislavII(King

) 1061-1092

Pfemysl Ottokar .

I 192-1230

KINGS OF BOHEMIA

tbe\

1516-1526
I 526-1 564
1 564-1 576
1576-1612
1612-1619

I 619-1620

1619^1637
1637-1657
1657-1705
I 705-1 71 I
1711-1740
I 740-1 780
1741-1745
1 780-1790
I 790-1 792
1792-1835
1835-1848
1848

I have continued the list of the rulers of Bohemia (most of
whom were Roman and afterwards Austrian Emperors) up to
the present day, as the title of King of Bohemia has always
been retained by these princes.

352

Venceslas I . . 1 230-1 253

Premysl Ottokar\ ^^^^ ^^^q

II . . ./ 1253-1278

Venceslas II . 1 278-1 305

Venceslas III . 1305- 1306

^ta-^ ^f ^^^"-j 1306-1307
Henry of Carinthia 1307-1310
John . . . I 3 10-1346
Charles I (IV) . 1346-1378
Venceslas IV . 1378-1419
Sigismund . . I436-I437
Alben of Habs.|,^3^_,^3^

Ladi^slas Posthu-j,^^^,,^^^
Vladislav II . . 1471-1516

Louis I
Ferdinand I .
Maximilian .
Rudolph II .
Matthew
Frederick of
Palatinate .
Ferdinand II
Ferdinand III
Leopold I
Joseph I
Charles II (VI)
Maria Theresa
Charles of Bavaria
Joseph II
Leopold II .
Francis

Ferdinand IV (I)
Francis Joseph

INDEX

Adalbert, 22-3, 28

Aehrenthal, Count, 350

Albert Adolphus of Nassau, 54-5,

57
Albert III, 88, 147, 152, 174-8
Albik, loi, 103

Ales of Riesenberg, 16S-9, 173
Alexander V, 99

VI, 197-8

Alt-Ranstadt, Treaty of, 313
Ambigatus, 2
Andrew of Prague, 40
Anhalt, Christian of, 251, 258,

272, 274-6
Anspach, Margrave of, 249
Aries, 80-1
Arnim, 303, 305
Arnulph, King, 17
Assembly of Protestants, 242,

243-6'
Augsburg, Battle of, 21

Confession of, 214

Augusta, Bishop, 210-11

Austi, John of, 104

Austi, meeting at, 119; storming

of, 121
Avignr-n, 65, 80
Azzo de' Visconti, 62

Bakunin, 336
Balbinus quoted, 79
BaUenhagen, 97
Baner, General, 308-9
Barante quoted, 186
Bartholomew of INIiinsterberg,

199, 201
Bartolomeo, Prignani, 84
Basel, Council of, 151, 159, 162-

6, 173-4, 176, 205
Bassewi, 297
Beatrice of Bourbon, 63
Beaufort, Heniy, 148
Bechyn, Tobias of, 56
Bela of Hungary, 44-5

Belcredi, Count Louis, 346, 348

Belloves, 2

Bellus, Nicolaus, 275

Benedict XIII, 87, 97

Berlin, Treaty of, 319

Bernabo de' Visconti, 81

Bethlen, Gabriel, 255, 263-6,
279, 286

Beust, Count, 34S-9

Bienenberg, 140, 170

Bielek, Dr., 294

Blanche of Valois, 64

Bohemian Brethren {see Pro-
testants)

"Bohemian Confession," 225-31

Boji, the, 3-6

Boleslav I, 19-23

11,21-4

Ill, 24-6

Boniface, VIII, 54

— — IX, 87, 90

Borek of Miietinek, 140, 169,

175
Borita, Jaroslav, 220
Borivoj, 16, 31-2
Bouquoi, 248, 250, 254-5, 261,

268-9, 274, 276, 331
Bozena, 26, 37
Brabant, Duke of, 6^
Bracciolini, Poggio, 107-8
Brache, Tycho, 218
Brandenburg, Duke of, 50, 81
Brandenburg, Valdemar of, 60,

70
Breitenfeld, Battle of, 302
Breslau, 1S7-8, 193
Bietislav I, 27-31

II. 31

Breznov, Abbot of, 235, 241
Bromley, Sir George, 271
Brown, H. F., 262
Brno, meetings at, 253
Brunswick, Duke of, 38-9
Bryce quoted, 81

353

354

Index

Budova, Budovec of, 219, 225-6,

229-30, 260
Butler, Colonel, 306-7

Calixtines, the, 113-4
Calixtus III, 189
Camerarius, 258, 260.
Campanus, 290-1
Candale, de, Anna, 200
CarafFa, Carlo, 284-5, 287
Carinthia, Duke of, 46, 56-7, 61,

64
Carjaval, Cardinal, 178, 188
Carlomann, 15-16
Carlyle, Thomas, quoted, 48, 58,

61, 316
Casimir, 62, 66, 81, 175
Caslav, Diet at, 133
Catholics {see "Church")
"Catholic Reformation," 282-91,

Cechs, the, 6-7

Cenek of Wartenberg, no, 1 18,

120, 124, 132-3, 136
Censorship of books, 198
Cesarini, Cardinal, 156-8, 164
Charles IV, 60, 62-6, 69-82
V, 204, 207-1 1

VI, 315-6

VII, 318-21

Charles Robert of Hungary, 62

Ciieb, 156, 306, 320

Chel^icky, Peter, 182-4

Chevet, 320

Chotek, Count, 330

Chotusic, Battle of, 318

Church, Establishment of Chris-
tian, 13-18, 22 ; difficulties,
40 ; founding of convents, 72 ;
reform, 78, 82, 83-4, 92-99.
Ill, 213-17, 295 ; General
Council, 155-6

"Cisleithania," 323

Clement VI, 65, 72

VII, 84-6, 204

Cola de Castro, Nicholas, 197
Comenius quoted, 280, 310
Conrad I, 30

HI, 33

Conrad ofVechta, 103, 159
Conrad of Znoymo, 33, 35-9
Constance, Council of, 104-6, 112
Constance, Emperor, 181, 183

Constantinople, Treaty of, 207
Constantinus Angelicus, 181
Conway, 276
Cornwall, Richard of, 45
Cosmas, 9-10
Cracow, Siege of, 66
Crecy, Battle of, 67-9
Creighton, Bishop, quoted, 117
Croatia, 21

Dacio, 35
Dalimil, 37
Dampierre, 248, 254
Daniel Romanovic, 46
Defenestration, the, 243-8
Democracy, growth of, 198-9,

277, 332
Denmark, 263, 287, 297
Devereux, Captain, 306-7
Deym, Count Frederick, 330
Dicastus, 259
Dietrichstein, Cardinal, 224, 28 1-

282
Domazlice, Battle at, 158-9
Domitian, 5
Drahomina, 19
Dresden, Treaty of, 321
Dubravius, 67
Dubravka, 21
Durrenkrut, Battle of, 49
Dusan, Stephen, 73
Dvur, Kralove, 7

Edward III, 66-8
Eger, meeting at, 161
Eggenberg, Prince, 301
Elizabeth, Princess, 58-60
Elizabeth (of the Palatinate), 258,

269, 272-3
Emaus, Abbot, in
Ernest of Pardubic, 65, ']l, 80
Eugenius IV, 157, 176
Everard of Brandenburg, 50-I

Fabricius, 246

Eels, Colonna of, 240, 245

Ferdinand I, 203-11

II, 218, 221, 231-2, 237,

240, 248, 252, 255-6, 286-7,
308

Ill, 307, 308, 310, 314

IV, 330

Fernando, Cardinal, 307

Index

355

Forcheim, Treaty of, 17
PVance, Anatole, quoted, 153
Francis I, 326-7
Frankfurt, meetings at, 84, 90,

307, 333
Frederick I (Barbarossa), 34-5

II, 41-2

Ill, 190

Frederick of Habsburg, 177-8
Frederick of HohenzoUern, 153
Frederick (of the Palatinate),

251-2, 256-78, 300
Frederick the Great, 315-21
Freeman, Professor, 69

Galeazzo de Visconti, 90
Gerstenberger, Dr., 233-4
Gindely quoted, 206, 210, 212,
216-8, 222, 224, 226, 231, 235,
240, 250, 252, 259, 262, 270,
279, 283, 287-8, 297, 299, 303
Giscra, 346

Glatz, Capture of, 318, 321
*' Golden Bull," the, 77, 83
Goll, Professor, 170, 182-3
Goluchowski, Count, 344-5, 350
Gordon, 306
Gorlitz, John of, 83, 89
Gothe, 329

Gradenigo, Vicenzo, 262
Grano, Caretto del, 289
Gregory VII, 29

IX, 41-2

XI, 82

XII, 97

Gregory, Brother, 1 83-4
Guido, Cardinal, 33

Habernfeld, Andreas ab, 211, 275
Habsburg succession, 203-4
Hannewald, 231
Harrach, Cardinal, 288
Havlicek, Chas., 331. 340-1, 344
Helfert, Baron, 77-8, 100, 327,

330
Henry I, 19-20

II, 25-6

Ill, 27

IV, 29

V, 32

VIII, 58

Plenry of Winchester, 148-9,152
Hermann, 4, no

Hoe, 257, 278, 308
Hofkirchen, General, 270
Hofler quoted, 86
Hohenfriedberg, Battle of, 321
Hohenwarth, Count, 293, 350
Honorius, Pope, 40
Hora, Helena, 7
Horic, 139
Hromadka, 121
Hubertsberg, Peace of, 322
Huerta, Martin, 289
Hungary, founding of, 18
Hus, John, 72, 92-155, 215

, Nicholas of, 113

Hvezda, 144
Hynek, 131

Illo, 305-6
Innocent III, 39

, IV, 41

. VI, 75

Irmer, Dr., 300
Ivancice, 223

Jacobedus, 108, no, 285
Jagemdorf, Margrave of, 281,

297
James I, 256, 258, 266-7, 276-7
Jankov, Battle of, 309
Jaromir, 24-6
Jenstein, John of, 86-8
Jerome, 102, 107
Jessenius, Dr., 279, 289
Jesuits, 211, 236, 247, 274, 285,

288-91, 313
Jihlava, 253
Joan of Arc, 152
Jodocus, 84, 88, 89, 99
John XX II I, 100, 105-6
Joseph II, 323-6

Kalnoky, Count, 350

Kalousek, Prof., 72, 94, 292,

319. 333
Karlsbad, 75
Karlstein, 74, 241
Kathwalda, 4
Kazi, 10

Kesselstadt, Battle of, 321
Khevenhliller, 262
Khlesl, Cardinal, 242, 248
Kinsky, Ulrich of, 245, 262, 306
Klingenberg, Henry of, 68 :

356

Index

Kolin, Battle of, 322
Kolovrat, Count, 330, 336
Komensky, 310
Konias, Andrew, 291
Koniggratz, Battles of, 140-1,

347
Konigsberg, 45
Koranda, 185
Korybut, Sigismund, 137-9, 142-

50, 157, 167
Krebs, Dr., 274-5
Kressenbrunn, Battle of, 46
Krofta, Dr., 282
Krokus, 10
Kromerize, 343
Kulm, Battles of, 32, 327
Kulmbach, Truce of, 153
Kumhutta, 51
Kunes of Belovic, 144
Kutna Plora, 98, 161, 196-7,

288

Ladisl as of Bohemia, 177-8, 180,

1S5-7
Ladislas of Naples, loi
Lamormain, 286, 288, 290, 298
Landy, 220
Language in Bohemia, 71-2, 92-

3, 294, 328
Lawrence of Brezova, 126, 131,

159
Lazan, Henry of, 104
" League of the Lords," 88-9
Lehel, 21
Leitomischl, John of, 91, 105,

149
Leopold of Austria, 42
Leslie, 306
" Letter of Majesty," 231-6, 402-

3*448
"Letter of Peace," 177
Leuthen, Battle of, 322
Lev, ZedeiiSk, 201-4
Levy Hradec, church at, 17
Leyden, quoted, 270
Libert, 336
Liben, Treaty of, 226
Libussa, 10, 26
Liechtenstein, Prince, 284, 291,

297
Linz, meetings at, 221, 238, 254
Lipany, 129
Lippa, Henry of, 59, 60

Lippa, Henry, the younger, 62
Lithuanian campaigns, 61, 64, 66
Liiomerice, 308
Litomysl, John of, 109
Livy quoted, 2
Lobelius, John, 283
Lobkowitz, Diepold of, 245-6

, William of, 246, 260

, Zdenek of, 227

Locika, 2S5

Loder, Dr., quoted, 109

Lontorp, 269

Lot hair, 32-3

Louis of Bavaria, 46-7

Louis " the German," 12, 16

Louis, King, 64-6, 70, 80- 1

Ludmilla, 17, 19

Lusatia, 34, 60, 280, 308

Lutherans {see Protestants)

Lutter, Battle of, 287

Liitzen, Battle of, 302

Luxemburg, John of, 57-69

Magyars, the, 18-21

Mail berg, Battle of, 30

Maintz, Diet at, 78

Mansfeld, 249, 254, 270-1, 277,

280, 284
Marbod, 3-5
Marcomannic War, 5-7
Margaret Maultasche, 61, 65
Maria Theresa, 315-24
Marradas, Balthasar, 289
Martin V, 124, 148, 152, 156
Martinic, 245-6
Mastino dell a Scala, 61
" Mater Verbornm," 7
Matthew, 221-39
Matthew Cervinus, 180, 188, 193,

196
Matthew of Janow, 79, 92, 184
Matthew, Emperor, 236-7, 247-8,

250, 255
Maximilian, 202, 204, 212-6, 228
Maximilian, Duke of Bavaria, 264,

268, 270, 273, 276, 302
Mayer, Martin, 190
Mehemed Aga, 266
Meissner quoted, 329
Menhard, 150, 175, 178
Mensdorf, General, 338-9
Methodius, 14-17
Metz, Diet at, 76

Index

357

Michael of Zambeik, 184
Michiel, Giovanni, quoted, 206,

213

Mieceslav I, 21

Milled of Kremsier, 78-9, 91-2

Milota of Dedic, 49

Mohac, Battle of, 202

Mojmir, 12-13, 17

MoUwitz, Battle of, 317

Mommsen quoted, 3

Monch, Henry, 67-8

Montague, Lady, 312

Moravia, John Henry of, 73

Moravian Church, 182 {st:e Pro-
testants)

Muhlberg, Battle of, 209

Muhldorf, Bauleof, 58

Miiller, Joseph. 330

Miinsterberg, Chas, of, 201

Nerberg, Baron, 335
Nicholas V, 178, 181
Niebuhr quoted, 2
Niederle, Dr., quoted, 2, 9
Nostitz, Count, 338
Novak, Dr., 50, 52

Olmatz, 55

Olmutz, ^ )tho of, 29, 31
Orsini, Bishop Urso, 197-8
Oiho I, 20-1
Ourschamp, 70
Oxenstierna, 307

Palacky quoted, 13, 20, 27, 30,
34, 49, 50, 56, 59, 63, 67-8,
72-4, 82-4, 94, 97, 105, 109,
112, 115, 120, 128, 131, 134,
136-7, 141, 144, 146, 149-55,
160, 162, 170, 175-6, 179, liii-
2, 185, 187, 191, 193, 194-5,
198-9, 328, 334-7, 341-4

Palec, Stephen of, 104-5

Parracidia, John, 57

Pastrnek, Dr., 13, 15

Patera, 7

Paul 11, 192

Payne, Peter, 147, 151, 161-4

Pekar, Prof., 307

Pelhi-mov, Battle of, 250

Pfauser, 21 1

Pflug, Kaspar, 208-9

Philibcrt, 165, 172, 174

Philip of France, 66

of Spain, 262

of Swabia, ^S

Philippi, Father, 288
Photius, 15

Pic, Dr., quoted, 2

Pillersdorf, Baron, 333

Pisa, Council at, 99

Pius H, 189, 192 {see Sylvius)

Plzeia, 166, 280, 305-6

Podebrad, George of, 169, 176-9,
180, 185-95, 285

Podebrad, Victorin of, 177

Podraokli, 308

Polzic, Harrantof, 279

Prague, Bishopric of, 22 ; Diets
at, 51, 56, 73, 144, 151, 160-1,
165-6, 176-8, 187, 208, 210,
223, 22^30, 239-40, 255, 345-
6, 349 ; university of, 73-4, 93,
III, 191,289; Articles of, 128,
154, 161 ; Consistory Letter of,
181 ; attacks on, 309-10, 318,
322, 337-8 ; Peace of, 347

Premsyls, the, 1 1, 17, 26, 36-41,
43-50

Presburg, Treaty of, 18 ; meeting
at, 222 ; alliance of, 261

Press, state of the, 339-40

Pribram, John, 147, 167

Priuli, Antonio, 260, 267, 271

Procopius, 256

Prokop, 84, 89, 91

Prokop the Great, 145-6, 150,
154-5, 157, 160-1, 170

Prokop the Lesser, 15S, 168, 170

Protestants, the, 205-19, 225-9,
141-2, 254, 277-8, 313

Protesiatio Boheniorum, 109

Ptacek, 175-6, 177

Pubitschka, 47, 152

Questenberg, Caspar, 283
Quiroga, Father, 302, 304

Racek, 87

Rakoczy, George, 309
RakoniCjBaitle of, 272, 274
Ramees, Lawrence, 237
Ranke, quoted, 211
Regensburg, Diet of, 47
Religious Tolerance, 197, 205,
325

358

Index

Restitution, Edict of, 298-9
Rezek, Prof*, 201, 203, 296, 310
Rican, Paul of, 245
Richard II, 85-6
Richenthal, 104
Richsa, Queen, 28
Rieger, Dr., 338, 342, 349
Rivoli, Treaty of, 252
Robert of Naples, 62
RohacofDuba, 169, 173
Rokycan, John of, 142, 147, 161-

7, 172, 175, 177-9, 180-4, 195
Rossitz, meeting at, 222
Rostislav, 13-15
Rundolph of Habsburg, 46-56

II, 215-37

Ruppa, Venceslas of, 245-6, 257,

259, 260, 300
Ruprecht, Elector Palatine, 90, 99

Sabinus, 282
Sadova, Battle of, 140
Sadska, Diet at, 33
St. Clement, College of, 290
Samo, 9

San Felice, Battle of, 62
Sarpi, Era Paoli, 278
Savoy, Duke of, 249, 251-2, 256
Saxony, Elector of, 253, 281, 294
Schebeck, Dr., 303
Schmalkalden, League of, 207
Schmerling, Baron, 345-9
Schulze, 258, 261
Schwarzenberg, Prince, 343
Segovia, John of, 158
Sigismund, 83, 88, 90-1, 96, 99,
loo-i, 104, 112, 117-29, 162,

171-5, 235
Sigoves, 2
Silesia, 316-18, 321
Skvorec, Wilfram of, 90
Slavata, 245-6
Slavs, the, 7-17
Smoyno, John of, 76
Sobeslav, 32-3
Solms, Count, 251
Soltl, Dr., 240, 251
Sophia, Queen, 100, 109, 118-20
Skytihnev, 17-19, 29
Starhemberg, Baron of, 254
Sterbohol, Battle of, 322
Sternberg, Adam of, 228, 239-40,

245

Stitny, Thomas of, 79
Strakonitz, Letter of Lords of,

180
Stransky, Paul, 226
Sudomer, Battle of, 122
Svatek, 162, 325
Svatopluk, 15-17

the younger, 17

of Olmiitz, 31

Sweden, 263, 299-302

Sylvester, Pope, 183

Sylvius, Aenaes, 48, 142, 157,

160, 162, 169 [see Pius II)

Taborites, meeting of, 119-20

Tacitus quoted, 4

Tartar invasion, 42-3

Teta, 10

Theobaldus quoted, 143

Thietmar, 22

Thirty Years' War, 246, 258 ; its

results, 311-12
Thurn, Count, 227, 232, 240-1,

246, 253-4, 260-1, 268, 280,

300-4

the younger, 275

Tiberius, 4

Tilly, 271-4, 287

Tilser, Prof., 347

Tomek, 31, 33, 63, 77, 85, 95-6,

104, 115, 117, 123, 142-3, 174,

335-^. 342
Torstensohn, General, 309
Tovac^ovsky, John, 197
Trcka, Count, 303
Trojan, Dr., 332, 342
Tschernembl, 254, 270, 276
Turkey, Peace with, 238
Tuscany, Grand Duke of, 263

Vandamme, 326
Vannius, 4

Venceslas, Treaty of, 200
Venceslas I, 19-20, 36
Venceslas II, 39-41, 50-4

Ill, 54-9

IV, 83-91, 97-104, 109, 112,

117-8
Verdun, Treaty of, 12
Vibilius, 4

Vienna, Bombardment of, 343
Villari quoted, 108
Vladislas I, 43

Index

359

Vladislas II, 33-6, 155, 176, 194,

196-200
Vladivoj, 25
Voderie, De la, 306
Vozic, 144
Vratislav, 17-19, 29-32

Waitzen, Bishop of, 188
Waldstein, Albert of, 245, 287,

295. 307
"Waldstein, John of, 214
Walhauser, Conrad, 78, 91
Wartenberg, John of, 201
Weimar, Duke of, 304, 306
Weitmil, Benes de, 69, 75
Weston, 276
White Mountain, Battle of the,

275-8
William of Holland, 43

of Julius, 7o

of Meissen, 88

of Saxony, 187-8

Windischgratz, 336-9, 342-3
Winter, Dr., 290-1
Witold, Alesr., 136-7
Wurzburg, Bishop of, 158
Wycliffe, John, 92

Zablati, Battle at, 254, 256

Zach, General, 335

Zampach, 76

Zampach, Kolda of, 169, 174,

180
Zasada, 86
Zavis, 51-3
Zbyn^k Zajic, 99-101
Zderad, 30

Zelena Hora, League of, 192-4
Zelivo, John of, 114
Zerotm, Chas. of, 223, 225-6^
V 238, 253, 280-1, 2S9
Zizka, John, 114-44, 160
Znoymo, 185, 223, 253
Zwe'ttl, Battle of, 147

Printed in Great Britain by

Richard Clay & Sons, Limited,

brunswick st., stamford st., s.e. i,

and bungay, suffolk.

University of
Connecticut

<^.

Libraries ^.

i ■ .v.-

.^'f-S'- I

2^kli

m^iiis^v . '^^

/Z/

::?:5C